The dsigrace of PMQs

In what should be one of the most revered establishments of democracy in the UK Prime Minster's Questions is farcical. As always the Prime Minister avoids answering questions and answers the one he wish they had asked.  The end of his response will be a jibe at the oppositions record, from which he would of had researchers delve into dubious statistics. Of course the use of reports and statistics is something both sides of the House use. However, they do not use the same sets and choose to use those which favour their own.  So what the public get is a skewed view, or not a lie but dubious truth of what the present state of the country is.  Maybe Mr Not-so-honourable Cameron does not like answering questions properly. If he were to do an exam paper at secondary school he would not get marks for answering a question he thought was asked but wasn't, he'd fail and never pass his exams. But he got where he is today, after going to a high profile University.  Therefore he must know how to answer a question, but he chooses not to answer the question.  He could be embarrassed by it, or the true answer would make him and his party look incompetent, or he just doesn't know the answer.  So it is a matter of avoidance and it is purposeful.  This can be seen when Cameron has nothing but a counter attack strategy to a question, as the saying goes "the best form of defence is offence." Which he certainly does advocate.

At PMQs MPs engage in what can only be seen as barbaric behaviour.  Every PMQ is as worse than supporters at a football match.  There is booing, jeering, shouting, screaming, the Speaker stands up and with a red and angry face points in one direction of the house and tells them "the question will be heard."  It is no wonder the online group called Mumsnet partitioned Berco about this behaviour.

What is needed is a set of rules, rules set out on the expected behaviour of all MPs at PMQ, expected behaviour on how questions should be answered, because they frankly never are, unless they happen to be benign.  However, politics is a cut throat game, and PMQs shows how bad it has become. It's only a pity both sides of the house are not working towards a strategy of government for everyone's advantage.  At the moment, it is only MPs themselves who are coming up on top, possibly because of their large pay cheques.

How not to deal with a high volume work load - a critique of Wikihow

In order to get some tips on dealing with a high workload I ventured onto Wikihow and an article titled "How to complete a high volume workload."  In reading it I tried to relate the experience of these tips to my own high volume workload and though what a load of codswallop. The word "codswallop" is English slang, possibly closely related to cockney and means rubbish or nonsense. I am unable to trace the origins of it at this moment. 

Wikihow's 7 solutions broken down

1. Create an organized work area. Now if you happen to work in a hot desking environment it means you do not have a set desk to sit at, you can not return to the same desk or guarantee the same desk each day. It also implies you are stupid enough not to understand how important organization is in a high volume work environment. So the suggestion is equally demeaning to the individual who reads it. This raised the heckles and inspired the writing of the critique.

2. Think about how your workload is increasing.  If you are already in a high volume workload environment it is usually quite apparent why your workload is increasing, but thinking about it doesn't actually improve the situation, there is no solution in understanding why your workload is high the solution is in how you deal with it.  Yes I have a fecking high pile of work on my desk which is the result of idiots in the IT department who can't get a fecking thing right because last week they had all cued up to have their third lobotomy. I got it on good authority the head of IT is now a goldfish and their IQ has shot off the scale.

3. Now this one made me laugh and I searched for the cream pie to ram it hard in the face of the Wikihow author who wrote it.  Again it takes assumptions the reader is an idiot and doesn't already know this.  Wiki's solution is, take a moment to review each task, work harder and work more accurately on the task and get it right first time.  Fecking codswallop, because any sane person would already know they are working harder than they have already worked before, they already understand the importance of getting something right first time and not wasting further hours doing it multiple times. In fact this point does nothing but to help make you feel more stressed in your own high workload environment.  I would suggest a large group of overworked volume people get together and seek out the author to then give them a dunce hat and sit them in the corner.  This is one possible retribution and for the sake of humanity is the lightest and least offence to read. After all who wants to break the human rights act?

4.  Know your priorities.  There maybe a little bit of sense in this comment, however let it be known the nature of a high volume workload can often mean it is actually difficult to know what your priorities are, especially if a good part of your day is spent fire fighting.  My second name is Fireman Sam, and I always have an extinguisher under my desk. It's very useful. Priorities can clash, be superseded and go out the window with a gust of air. Probably from the fart of the individuals who wrote this well meaning but short sighted set of solutions.

5. Consider the aspects of the work task which get it done.  Here the emphasis is on understanding again how to do you work and what part of the task is going to be most important.  Although really what this point is saying when you read between the lines "if you don't already know what the most important aspects of a task are, then you really should not be doing it and should be sacked." For if you are already in a high volume work environment it is the volume which is killing you not the tasks, were the same tasks in a low volume environment you'd have no problem.  There is a small bit of hope on this solution form Wikihow as it says the person who gave you the task has confidence in you.  But equally the person who gave you the task could be overstretched has got nobody else available and you muggings are the only one they can turn to. Of course you can feel good about yourself because there is a suggestion of you are the person for the job.  However, feeling good about yourself doesn't actually get the work done.

6. Treat yourself kindly.  At last here is a morsel of help which could of been elaborated on more, it could of had an entire web page on how to keep yourself psychologically healthy in a high volume workload environment. Sadly Wikihow does not.  The most important solution so far and with very little meat.  All I can say is don't ever ask Wikihow how to make a ham sandwich, it will talk a great deal about the bread and give you two words about the ham.

7.  And now a hilarious comment with no actual solution at all, as indeed most of the pointers by Wikihow appear to be just that, solution-less dribbles from an idiot with a dunce hat on.  Here it states you should take pride in being a go-getter who is on top of their workload.  However, you have to keep it up, because they will have no toe rags pulling dead lead legs around.  Feck someone give me a slap in the face if this is any kind of solution at all, then cover me in honey and throw me into an infested pit of insects who particularly like honey. Give me a break what planet has this solution come from?

So I learnt absolutely nothing from Wikihow, it was like watching a film with great actors only to see the script was crap, the story was crap and I'd just been shafted for my money at the box office.

If your workplace has put you in a position which makes it a high volume and pressurised environment the best thing you can do is to change your mental viewpoint.  Your employer knows what the problems are and your employer doesn't have the capacity to deal with them.  If they are unsupportive of you why should you be supportive and break your back doing everything you can. What will happen is you will get burn out.  Change your own mental attitude, do your work but don't let this environment because a mental stressor which results in your own breakdown, get your fists up and stay calm and cool as you can.  If at the end of the day your employers expectations are so high they can not be met, you have the option of walking.  Yet this is usually a stupid suggestion to make because you have responsibilities at home, mortgage to pay, food to put on the table.  Put it another way, a stressful workplace and a mental breakdown also want do you home life any good, your mortgage any good or the people you love any good.  Ultimately consider, life is short anything can happen and do everything you can in your arsenal of mental crutches to protect your own well being.  If this doesn't work, log every incident which is of particular stress to yourself especially diarising discussions.  Create an evidence folder and then consider the option of constructive dismissal.  Take legal advice on any such decisions, but think how much is your own peace of mind worth, and is your organization supportive in it's duty of care which includes mental as well as physical health?

Wikihow you need to get your act together and learn to answer the question when it is asked and answer it properly.

George Bush the artist, you're kidding

The news today had an article about George W. Bush, apparently he'd taken up painting now he was no longer a president. I suppose someone like him has to do something in their spare time. The pictures were in no doubt bloody awful. He got air time because he was was the unfortunate choice of president for an American public who must of been having a particularly backwards day when he won the election.  There's no change about him, he is still the not very bright man he always had been.  Except now he doesn't control enough fire power to bring a nuclear winter to the entire world. One picture shown was of Tony Blair, and this was given a fortunate comical appearance to it. Deserving of what Tony Blair should be remembered, the Tory in red clothing. The pictures he seemed to concentrate on were of famous world leaders, portraits. I doubt whether he painted them as they sat for him. He probably used photographs or TV. I have a 13 year old nephew who likes to draw and am sure he would do a similarly decent portrait. Maybe he'd do one of Bush. The thing is nobody would want to view it. Afteral the subject is a bit boring lets not say too much about the painter either.

Cameron, now what is his problem

Cameron is a bit like the racing driver who likes everything one sided, the best team, the most money, the most up to date, engine, tyres and equipment and a bit of sabotage of the opposition whenever possible. To put it frankly, the cards have got to be stacked in his favour before he even gets to sit at the table. He can not take surprises or be questioned on things which requires he think about them. He likes to be heard and not questioned, if he is then he'll only repeat himself or go on the defensive. He is a poor man's intellectual, not to mean he is poor but he would never inspire anyone in their right mind.  This would account for his constant, constipated angry look. In fact he should be called the constipated Prime Minister with his side kick smarmy school boy Georgie. These things always appear clear when he is at the dispatch box.

Time and time again Cameron will espouse the great deed of putting people into work, yet repeatedly he is unable to ask the question why it is the cost of living has dropped and why is it a large proportion of these jobs are low paid and part time hours. This leads him on the defensive to chastise the previous government and request an apology for their record.  Yet the national deficit is 1.2 trillion pounds and continues to increase. On the issue of asylum for Syrian refugees, Cameron diverts from the question and refuses answer why the UK will  not be taking in refugees.  Then yet again in facing a question from Miliband of why there is 13 million people in the UK in poverty and being in work Cameron again has no answer.  Yet again he goes on the defensive attacking Labour and their prediction there would be a higher unemployment rate. The reality of people being on welfare benefits and also being sanctioned more frequently on those benefits is not considered by either party.  It is clear though, if more people in poverty than there has been and there are more people in work and more people claiming some form of national assistance. The numbers don't add up. Labour has a question which has to be answered.

Yet as we know, he'd rather continue to hold the angry constipated PM look. As PM he leads an example of what good behaviour should be, and his aggression and avoidance of questions makes PMQs look as Berkow says like a Punch and Judy show.

Osborne's stupidity moves to higher levels of stupidity

It seems George Osborne never fails to go from one level of stupidity to another level of stupidity. He must live above a well of ignorance and stupidity and each time he goes home he is recharged again with these wonderful traits run through his personality like the place name on a stick of rock. (sugary cylindrical sweet,generally bought from sea side towns with the town's name printed through it). He stands on in his pulpit and tells Europe it needs to become more competitive and generate more wealth, stating it has been in steady decline for years, suggesting it was in decline even before the Tories came to power.  So although he and Cameron stood at the dispatch box and chastised Labour's government, they actually know and understand the recession of Europe is European and not British alone.  They've known this all along but like the idea of giving a kicking to the opposition. This is where Ed Miliband is unable to defend his party as he is unable to roll his sleeves up and play dirty, unlike Ed Balls who seems to have a real knack of being able to get under the skin of many Torys.

The Tories have excelled at job creation and on every chance will publicly state this, but equally the public response is to ask, how many of these jobs are on zero hour contracts, how many of these jobs are low paid, how many people are taking up multiple jobs as a means to support themselves.  In addition they target the benefits system and want to reduce the benefits bill. Yet, many of those same persons who are taking up these jobs which have been made have to request additional subsistence from the state to top up their income.  The retorting argument asks the Tories to examine the cost of living crisis the country is going through but they don't want to know about it.  It is a case like everything else, the Devil is in the details and Osborne knows it.  On a recent episode of Question Time even the Tory chairman Grant Chapps was seen to be unable to adequately answer these accusations.  He just doesn't have a clue, just like Osborne, born with a silver spoon in his mouth.

Osborne has only one cure for a recession, it is to cut back, and cut back even further.  His Tory illiterates are unable to consider it will only take an exceedingly long term view of the economy and the world which will bring the UK out of recession and make it competitive.  We're talking ten or twenty years.  He wants to cut back on welfare but in doing so he doesn't consider what is the best way to get people totally dependent on the welfare state off the welfare state. He doesn't consider these people may have become part institutionalised into being incapable or helpless.  He has got an notion how to encourage and help them gain pride in theirselves, he'd rather just cut back further and make an even lower social class of poverty the country has ever seen.  He can not see it is the who package which needs to be acted on. Education, help, support, responsibility and even employers who can see they to have to take a role in training people. A new born baby may not be able to speak so you wouldn't want it on a call centre, but at the same time you know in twenty years it will be a capable human being. Employers need help to recruit from the long term jobless and take on staff who may not be of much use this very moment, but after sufficient training and support they will be valuable employees. Nope, George sees only one way ahead, cut, cut, cut, let the rich stay rich and the poor get even poorer.

In ten or twenty years from  now George Osborne will be in the news again. I can see in him an individual who likes to be in the limelight, he loves the attention. There is a touch of the histrionic about his personality, as well as a touch of the stupid, a bloody big touch of the stupid.  I can see George being in the news for something bad he has done, or for losing his entire livelihood.  For this is the future for someone as stupid as he is.  Unless he can employ helpers on zero hour contracts who are a bit more knowledgeable.  Of course he will, he's setting up the economy right now for this kind of scenario.  But mark my words George is heading for a fall at some time, I'm sure it will be when he is out of government. The crystal ball has told me so.

Impossible people, the vamipires of mental health

It has taken me my full life to really understand there are people I just can not get on with.  The saddest thing is some of these people are my closest relatives.  No matter how hard I try to talk reason with them it is as though I am on a different planet. They will not listen, and even if I begin by listening to them, to do my best with all the skills I've picked up, such as empathy, unconditional positive regard and active listening. They will not return the courtesy.  They are stuck in the same repeated behaviours and discussions time and again. No matter how I approach them the results are the same.  I if I give an inch they take a yard.  They always want to talk about themselves about their problems, about how things are so bad for them, they don't give a shit about pulling anyone else down into their insular quagmire of depression. Those of my family should be loving, compassionate and supportive, but everything is with a caveat. I resorted to not speaking to one person for about 12 months. Difficult seeing as I live with them, the self-centreness of them. I just can not handle it.  I want to communicate, to really chat but there is no avenue for words to be let in, the doors are closed. Realization and understanding in this situation are alien terms.

There are times I always question whether it is me, am I the one who has some mental illness because I can not communicate with them.  Yet I can communicate with many other people. Then the realisation breaks through it is not I who has the mental health issues it is them. One has been been hospitalised for mental health issues, another has been on long term anti-depressants and has varying degrees of agoraphobia, a third has been to counselling and recommended anti-depressants but refused them.  An in-law is an alcoholic and lives with the first depressed individual.  It's got the point I can recognise a mentally ill person faster than a cowboy can draw their gun in a duel. I too find I change my attitude and behaviour pattern when I am around my relatives, they have been given too much of my time and effort so now I don't want to even bother, I don't want to engage and this in itself could be another contributing factor.  However, I do my best not to converse to any great extent with them. Not engaging is a self preservation strategy and it doesn't waste heart ache and soul. I'd love them to change or to make an active effort to change their lives, but it seems to me there is no motivation to do so. They will carry on as they are, until the day they no longer breath.

These people do not just exist in families, they exist in every walk of life. The next worse place to encounter them is at work.  Here they sill remain impossible people but there is an unavailability about them. Some of them are able to climb the ladder of responsibility, they get into positions where it is inexplicable how they got there in the first place. It is inexplicable they are able to take the responsibility, and quite frankly they don't. I recall one woman many years ago at work who just talked a load of shit all the time. But staff had to listen to her because she was a middle manager. Eventually higher management got rid off her through a restructure and her next job was substantially reduced in grade and responsibility.  Another manager I remember with utter distaste was one who thought she was a lovey dovey actor type personality, however more than this she thought she knew best on everything. Those who did not share her opinion had no opinion worthy of listening to, she was said to have been responsible for giving her manger a mental break down. But the plain truth of the matter was, she was an invidious bully and  those around her had to suck up or they would become the next victims to her bullying practices.

I read an article about impossible people on the internet. Simply you are never going to change these people and at some point you have to let them go from your life, even if they are relatives. If all they do is pull you down and depress then there is no alternative.  One strategy mentioned is silence, another I guess is doing your dam best to make sure you see them as infrequently as possible. Or you can treat them like children.  Yet they are adults in every sense.  They have lived decades and haven't learnt or introspected on their actions, on how other may see them.  If they can't be bothered to listen to you why should you be bothered to listen to them. Let them get on with their life and be what they are going to be. If help is refused and the only help they really want is your own mental well being to be as warped as theirs. Then it's just not worth it, for I will guarantee depressed mentally ill family members will either not have a job or have a really crappy job and forever be moaning about it.  But they will not see they have any power to do anything about their own situation, preferring to attribute the locus of control outside of themselves.

The thing is, normal people can not actually deal with abnormal impossible people. Another expression I've read used for these persons is Emotional Vampires.  Which is so true. It becomes a difficult task keeping your own sanity around them. Stopping yourself from getting angry, or from getting into those vicious circle arguments which go nowhere and achieve nothing. They just will not learn or understand, and it takes your own realisation and conscious decision making process to stop your own behaviour from providing oxygen to their fires.  It also leads me to an inevitable conclusion, you can not expect emotional or psychological support from these people, you can not expect them see anything other than their own point of view. They will never break out of this and they will never change their ways or seek to improve their situation. Which means, you can only change  your ways or run for the hills. Up in those hills you may even find another person who knows where you are coming from. Stephen Covey in his book 7 Habits of Highly Effective people terms this as being Pro-active.  By this he means you have to change your own rose tinted spectacles through which the world is interpreted and how you act.  It's like consciously saying, this person may be the most obnoxious person in the world, but I'm not going to let anything they say or do have any meaning to myself.  Although insightful, it is very difficult to do, but it can be achieved.

South Africa and the signs

It has been sad that one of the after events to linger on in public consciousness is the fake sign language interpreter.  I really don't know who he thinks he his kidding but to me, he doesn't know how to sign at all. So it is pretty obvious he has more than 15 minutes of fame and he got paid a handsome wage for it as well. His excuse of having schizophrenia has not been verified by any medical professional, so it even compounds his lie further.  Further this suggests to me South Africa is has an element of corruption so deep in it, allowing a fake signer to interpret at an international world event which puts South Africa on the world stage is one of the worse things going.  A developing country should never of allowed this to happen in the first place. In my opinion the only thing this man should be signing is the receipt for his personal belongings after coming out of a cell.  If South African's take no action and fail to investigate this further it could suggest they are resigned to their own corruption and the world can not take them seriously. 

I ask could this be the return of a tribal state as well?  In watching an episode of the politics program called Question Time which was broadcast from Johannesburg it seemed evident a lot of black south African's felt angry at white South African's and contrary to Madella's view of reconciliation and forgiveness, these people came across as wanting not just their land back but blood.  It's clear the country is dissatisfied with Jacob Zuma and the ANC.  It is in a conflicting state of mind because it was the ANC Mandela was a member of, but as they say, things change. The danger is of an extreme right wing who now get a chance and foothold. If they do we'll see yet another African state at war with itself with mass murder and possibly genocide.

Who know's what the outcome is going to be over the next few years, but there is no doubt in my mind this is a country in the throws of political uncertainty.