Yvette Cooper needs to go

After watching an interview from the Daily Politics show between Yvette Cooper and Jo Coburn it is crystal clear, this woman does not represent her constituency and needs to be kicked out of her seat. The reason for this is the toxic subject of immigration. Jo reminded Yvette there was 66 per cent support for a BREXIT in Yvette's own constituency, but yet Yvette was on record multiple times as having supported the remain camp. In a typical back peddling exercise we see Yvette hop skip and jump backwards, doing everything she can to make herself look like she was trying to advocate means to tackle immigration, but at the same time was a remainer. The two views are contradictory. An MP should represent their constituency, so Yvette has gone against the opinion of her own supporters who were massively in favour of BREXIT. Yvette Cooper's seat as an MP is untenable because of this.

Yvette Cooper is MP for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford, this constituency is in West Yorkshire but it is clear from her accent she is not from this part of the UK. Prior to 2010 this her constituency was Pontefract and Castleford where she became an MP in 1997, taking over from an a previous entrenched Labour MP Geoffrey Lofthouse who decided to retire at that time. Lofthouse's last election victory saw him with an eye watering 23,000 majority vote, which was 69.9% of the vote.  Effectively Yvette Cooper had began her life in politics with one of the safest seats an MP could hope to gain. It has been given to her on a silver platter, she didn't need to graft, to go out and talk to the public or do anything spectacular at all. All she needed to do was stand there like an scare crow and she would of been voted in because she was the officially elected Labour candidate. 


Yvette Cooper was actually born in Inverness yet does not have a Scottish accent. Her father went down the road of being a professional unionist, so no doubt had many strong union ties. Yvette was educated in Hampshire which again is a at least 100 miles away from where she is now as MP.  She did her PPE degree at Oxford, which suggests she was fortunately supported by her parents who forked out the financial spondoolies to help her on her career path. Cooper is not a Yorkshire girl in any sense of the word and cannot be representative of a constituency she probably had never visited prior to her being put on Labour's candidate card. The whole process of selecting Yvette Cooper has a resounding smell of nepotism from the ranks. It is ridiculous MPs are selected by parties and they have not actually come from the constituencies they represent and is false representation of the worse kind. Cooper should of tried her hand at being important in Hampshire not in Yorkshire. Infact the more details which are apparent from Wikipedia and other sources indicate Cooper has led a pretty privileged life, nothing of the sort which could be anywhere near understanding the hard working people of West Yorkshire.

So again the question is, why is Yvette Cooper an MP for a constituent she had no ties with? Why is she still an MP when she clearly went against the voting record of her own constituents in the BREXIT referendum? None of this adds up and begins to stink so bad it smells nearly as bad as the nepotism which is expected in Tory party politics. Cooper didn't go back to Alton in Hampshire to represent a constituency where she grew up for good reason. In 1997 East Hampshire polled Tory with a majority of 11,000 and 48% of the vote. So in reality this woman had a privileged upbringing in a Tory constituency and enjoyed the Tory life style as she grew up. Her political career no doubt had been heavily helped by family ties to the unions. For there is no way in hell she could of had any kind of career in politics in Hampshire.

It is a sad incitement of politics when politicians do not come from the constituencies they are in some way tied to. Yvette Cooper's case is a prime example of our own government now being overtaken by career politicians who have not held jobs outside of politics, who have no unique quality which marks them out as different and a character you can identify with. The fact is Cooper could of just as well became a Tory if she wanted and certainly in a place she knew.

Respect your elders?

There is a saying which gets pulled out of a hat now and again it is"respect your elders" and I will admit to disliking it to the point of vomiting. Respect is an odd concept. Because someone has a certain position in life it doesn't mean they should be given respect. There is for example a number of presidents in America who never had the respect of some of the public, or here, the Royal Family or even our own Prime Ministers. Because a certain office is held it doesn't mean the holder of said office should be given automatic respect. The same goes for age. I don't know why it was but I am sure this saying was said a number of times when growing up. In my real experience I have found older people as ignorant, racist and plain dumb as anyone else. Age should not confer an automatic status of respect. In fact such people who say these words do so in order to shut down a conversation or argument, as though they are magic words and to an extent rules. They are not. Hence it was with unsurprising when I saw a video of an elderly woman who was in dispute with a mother carrying her baby and didn't want her to sit on the seat next to her in a first class train department.


Mother and baby in first class row

The clip shows an elderly woman with the mistaken belief she can say what she likes to another person, additionally it shows snobbery if not racism. For in the early part of the video she says "you should respect your elders and betters" such a comment in certain circles would be like waving a red flag to a bull. What can certainly be said of the mother is how respectful she is to a bitter old goat who has spoken without thinking. The baby is the cutest little baby boy you could see, he is quiet and oblivious to what is going on around him. Had this mother been hysterical no doubt he would of taken on her feelings and felt afraid, in turn he would of cried and made the journey unpleasant for everyone. In my opinion this woman deserves a medal and the old girl should be fined for bad behaviour unbecoming of an individual who should know better. The mother kept calm and her behaviour was impeccable. The other odd thing which is noticeable from this video clip is when what appears to be an elderly man off camera interjects on behalf of the old woman. As though he has some business and say in the discussion. Again with dignity it is explained to him why the mother can take the seat. Unfortunately to say like the old woman he seemed to show an instance of stupidity and ignorance.

The word respect is used too much and should be banned from all use. Those who are old and would like this to be a baseball-bat-killer punch had better beware, because one thing for sure I have not and never will give anyone respect just down to their age. For there have been way too many instances I've encountered where elderly people don't deserve it and they certainly don't get it from me.

Not all Samosas are the same

One of the best somosas I ate was from an Indian Take Away. Happening to walk past the shop on one of those lets-have-a-walk days, I popped in and ordered a portion. The interesting thing was they also provided a piece of lemon and a small tub of sauce. The lamb somosas had just been cooked in oil so there was a little leakage but they were lovely and spicy. I also noticed the Take Away had a high star rating sticker in the window. This was about 30 years ago. I've not had a samosa as good as that one since. Even going back to the shop some years later to try and capture that same moment, only to be disappointed. The shop had changed, it's standards dropped and now the samosa was cooked in a microwave, there was no crispyness to it and it was even a little soggy. As is always the case with pastry like foods which have been zapped with radiation to cook them. Perhaps I slightly lie, because I have eaten very good somosas from Indian restaurants. However the thing with samosas are these are foods which you shouldn't get wrong. Everyone knows what they are and what they should taste like. So the reality is the standard should be high, exceptionally high. But it's not.

Yesterday the samosa inkling grabbed me by the throat and compelled me to order samosa from a food stall at my local market. The mobile food unit is ran by Nepalese people and is called Nameste, you'll find a few local nepalise men hanging around it at each lunch time. They are I assume ex-ghurkas because their old military base is up the road. Ever since the Ghurkas have been allowed to settle in the UK a great many of them have accepted the invite and come over. They barely speak a word of English and then stay in multiple occupied properties supporting each other as small communal units. Nepal is next to India and the share similar cultures. Spicy food and somosas being one of them. Unlike the samosas I'm used to which are kind of flat looking these were more small bulky pyramids. The did not have lamb in and it seemed the vegetable samosa was the only one they did. These to were microwaved so  again the instant disappointment radar comes on. Unfortunately the radar was right, they were packed with slightly spicy potato and peas but for some reason had a dry taste to them. Not even the small tub of lemon come spicy juicy stuff was able to take away the dry yukky-can't-eat-anymore reflex. The last two of the five parcels ended up in the bin. At this point I made a mental memo to myself, I'd eaten from this stall before and thought exactly the same thing. These samosas were not up to scratch and must be very mindful not to purchase them from this stall again. It's detestable throwing away food, I know I love it.

The quest for the perfect samosa will continue and the perfect one has to be one you get from a take-away experience. Samosas are finger food, they are to be eaten as a quick snack just to tide you over while going from one place to another and there isn't time to have a full meal or the need for a full meal. But of course, not all samosas are the same.

Addicted to youtube, vids and media

I'm an addict, from youtube to radio, to TV to those small cute or funny clips which pop up on my FB feed. It is a combination of addiction and procrastination. I can sit for hours just watching cute cats, dogs or minutes of repeated fails. Then there are the instant Karma videos, street food videos and amateur comedy clips. They take up hours of time which could be used doing something else instead. Yet I don't want to be studying, I'm being passive and enjoying procrastination of the internet side. My partner knows this and ensures I'm set up with tasks to do, which usually take hours and hours and mean I have to show something from the time spent rather than a flat bum sitting on a seat or an increased utility bill from sitting close to the fire. I know this is not good and I know a lot of time is wasted. In effort to try and stop this I then do write up review of things related to work or which interest me. Items for my own self and good. However, within half an hour or so before realising it I am then drawn back to FB to see how my soldiers have done in an online game. One which requires a minimum of logging in twice a day. What is happening why is this internet taking such control over me. I feed my brain with passive chair sitting and engagement in entertainment and can't find a way out. It means I am truly an addict.

Help!

Shami Chakrabati new love of Tory ideals

I used to think that Shami Chakrabati was the proverbial knight in white armour, standing up for the rights of the poor, the vanguard of Liberty and above the sodden damned behaviour of a Tory. Yet this is not the case, since leaving Liberty, getting her honours and becoming Baroness Shcarabati with a CBE there is an apparent hypocritical aspect of her behaviour. In fact, if I hadn't known otherwise I'd of said she was now right leaning and possibly sitting on the electric fence of the nasty Tory party. For example, accepting her honours stinks of someone like all of those who have before, being a sycophant to the establishment. And especially to royalty, which in normal left circles would be like drinking tea laced with cyanide. No lefty in their right mind would accept a CBE honours, it is disgraceful behaviour to say the least. Going into the house of Lords though could have a advantage to the Labour party as it puts another red bum on a seat.  Perhaps slightly strengthening their position, except for the fact the Lords is overrun with Tory incumbents and more Lords than there are seats.

Another item which has come out now in the press, is Shami sending her son to a private £18,000 a year school. This is so disgusting it will probably mean some olden labour members will have thought they'd just washed their mouths out with sewage. Shami has been for state schools and improvement of the education system but it is as though her popularity, wealth and fame has now pushed her to the heights of try Toryism. She has become a complete and utter hypocrite. How can she stand up and advocate for the rights of the under privileged in this country and yet drink from and eat from the tables of the fat privileged classes? By all means Shami support your son in his education, get him a private tutor at the weekend or in the evenings but give him a understanding of the values state school provides, not the arrogance of the wanker Tories. Shami is now by default making her son a right wing priveleged member of the elite who will look down on the rest of society as the Tory bench does now. Believing their rule and wealth is something of an entitlement and is not never wrong.

I know Shami is trying to be a help to Corbyn, it was her who wrote a report into the labour party and it's anti-semetic actions and how to deal with racist, xenophobic members. Yet, Shami is stinking now so much in opulence she should take herself out of the public eye and never again venture into the political realm. Unless of course she accepts she is now a full Tory. Then we can all elaborate on how very nasty she is.

The value of books

A book read has value, one which is not has no value. However, in addition to this physical books take up room in an environment, they are nice to know they are but unless used on a regular basis what is their need? Perhaps it is in the knowledge they hold within and sometimes it is just good to have a book in order to refer to it. Pick it up off the shelf and take a gander, a cursory look because from nowhere at all a question has popped up in your head and that book can answer your question. yet nowadays we have infamous search engines which can do the work and nearly everyone has an electronic devise which will allow instantaneous look up. But still a book takes up space on the shelf, gathers dust and sits there patiently to be used, if at all. Some books just sit there and are not used at all waiting to be read. Whilst others have to be carried around to be read at stolen moments in time. On a bus journey from home to work or during a lunch break. They deserve respect and time and are wonderful things, unless they happen to be a little bulky in which case it becomes the brick, the little short fat friend which resides in a ruck sack on your back until it has been finished.

I love books, I love knowledge and I hate forgetting all the things I've read but this is something which I can not do anything about. Mnemonic devices take time to master and it is way much easier just to sit down and have a drink than to sit and roam a memory palace.

The written word can now be held in your bag on an electronic device. For example those multiple pdf reports can be converted to readable Kindle reports and carried about without the need to carry masses of paper. Even somewhat large smart phones can be used as reading devices. However, a degrading and annoying aspect of printers is the need to swindle the same amount of money out of a customer for downloading a book as it would cost to purchase a paper copy. This is most annoying when said book has been around for years and years but may actually be a specialist item. For instance something you would study from if at university or college. Or happen to be a manager and just wanted to keep up or understand the literature on management practices. It is at this point the second hand book comes into a value market all of it's own.

Recently I wanted to purchase a book for my Kindle it is titled Flawed Advice and the Management Trap by Chris Argyris.  With the subtitle of How Managers Can Know When they're Getting Good Advice and When They're Not. The book was printed in 2000, so is a good few years old, but is still worthy reading material and something I had an interest in. However, purchasing it for my Kindle would of meant nearly paying out £30 and this was a factor I was not going to agree to.  So I checked out the second hand book market and got the same book for about £5.  Approximately five or six times cheaper than the Kindle version. I found this second hand version to have some character, it had to travel all the way from America to the UK. However I was not bothered about waiting time and it would arrive when it arrives. Some of the pages had thin copper page markers on which I had never seen before, I removed these and dropped them in my personal stationary. Some pages had writing on them and even yellow highlighting. Yet each page was in great condition, none of them has been bent over and folded. The previous owner of this book had left their imprint on it, I can read their notes are see their highlighted passages and then agree or disagree to myself whether they thought each part was important or not. I also now write in the book with my own pencil. I don't think pen ink should be used unless there is little choice, but perhaps the ex owner knew the book was only going to be used briefly and then resold on.

The value of this book is just as it was when it first was printed, but only if you really needed to have it. I am enjoying my read and note taking and equally shafting the publishers who wanted to gain monies a second time from something they printed many years ago.  Given Mr Argyris died three years ago he's not being deprived of royalties, it's a shame all books are not given free knowledge status once the author has died, after all how can society benefit and improve if it is not allowed the luxury of reading it's own history or science?

Education, society and the 11 plus exam

There is an indisputable fact the world is unfair and becomes more apparent when growing up, in the finite steps between childhood to adulthood success and failure is determined. The availability of opportunities determines the direction where an individual is going. Not their actual mental ability. Whilst, an espoused theme is educational attainment level relates to opportunity. This is not true, for education is not particularly the most important thing for a child. It is the alleged educational level decides a child's future. Yes, education can be a highly significant factor in a child's future however a further advantage can be sort by providing a child with the want and the motivation to get the highest grades possible. Paying for this through private schooling, tutoring or lots of parental assistance is always adding to their advantage.

No matter how the political system of the UK changes, any conscious person can see the wealthier and more engaged parents are with their children the more opportunities there will be. Parenting skills and upbringing have a direct relationship to where a child ends up as an adult.  The unfairness of Britain's education system or rather life opportunity system is that parents behaviour will decide how well a child progression in life. Adult can make their own opportunities yet again with the help of a family network or a wealthy to wealthy network they will go further. The educational achievements of the vast majority of Tory MPs and ministers is testimony to this, just as does their public speaking.  They are from a different social class one which endeavours to increase the advantage of their kin whenever possible. It is an open secret. However, regardless of their class there is a unchallengeable truth, the majority of politicians, leaders and world leaders actually fail to impress with their intelligence and quiet often their personality.

In the UK an argument continues about education, Prime Minister Teresa May, who is unelected has decided to introduce two further changes to the education system. The re-introduction of grammar schools and the allowance of 100 per cent selection for faith based schools. Faith schools are based on selecting pupils who are of a particular faith, the notion is if both education and faith are intertwined they will be congruent with each other.  Of course this does not question whether their faith is a faith which should be used as a model of society. When considering the number of faiths there are in the world. A system based on this notion would ensure the homogeneity of a select part of society for a long time. When we are living in a secular society this is abhorrent. Secularism gives individuals the chance to change their faith a when it doesn't make sense. To move away from something they may not believe and don't want to be controlled by. A 100 per cent faith school will be 100 per cent control. Society will become even more segregated than it has ever been. A person going to a faith school may never know what the thoughts feelings and attitudes of someone from another different faith background. They will be susceptible to believe their faith is above the laws of society and not have to follow the same rules as everyone else. Ultimately society will become polarised, with separate groups defined by their faith, clothes and practices and seclude themselves from contact with those who are not the same. I can not think of a more destructive societal system. If a faith is strong it should not matter how it is challenged, for strength comes from challenge. If a faith is weak it will fail in the face of challenge. Importantly in an equal society all faiths are equal and so is the belief in non-faith (Atheist) logic and scientific.

Grammar schools were developed with the idea education attainment should be a guide to where a child progresses from the age of 11 onwards. If they pass their 11 plus exam they then have the automatic right to attend a grammar school. This is a school with a lot more resources than the normal state secondary school and fewer pupils per teacher. Grammar schools have high standards, not the standards of faith schools which are based on specific religious contexts but standards based on educational attainment with good teaching.

The 11 plus exam is made to weed out those children who do not have dedicated parents, who do not have indigenous links in society and a wider network to call on and those who are likely to be relegated to the lower echelons of society. More than this it is another stab into the self-esteem of children. Children who for a moment are noticed by parents who want them to do well, but at the same time think, well if I didn't pass it then I don't expect my child to pass it. This is self defeatism of the poor and the weak minded. Who perceive their world to be the downtrodden and it will always stay there. They are broken and in turn imbibe the same broken spirit in their children. Social movement cannot even be considered in their mindset. Their place is their place, full stop.

Secondary state schools are where the rest of society go, these are persons who are not considered elite and are not given additional help up the ladder. They don't stand on the shoulders of helping hands. The majority will go to secondary schools, but of course not all secondary schools are the same they to have a league table and the term 'secondary' is now being replaced with 'Academy' school. Meaning the head of the school will determine the pay levels of teachers and can seek to get private sponsorship to help the school. And just like 'secondary' schools Academy schools are not all equal. It seems equality or rather inequality is rife.

Here is a notion one which would even the field. Why not have just one type of secondary school, no private schools and no faith schools. Make it compulsory all children must attend one of these schools and illegal for full-time home based education. Those parents who want the best for their children can then either chose to engage with the school to bring up it's standard or engage private teachers out of the school system. In addition the school should be in a relatively close area, perhaps within a three mile maximum distance. Each of such school would have to be accountable, teachers would be accountable and students would be accountable, and lastly parents must be accountable. Society would integrate as different faiths are crossed at an early age and so are challenged. Those who want better for their children can become school governors and push for the school to improve. Governors can advocate for changes to systems in use, set standards, push for bad teachers to be sacked and lets face it we've all memories of bad teachers. Burnt out teachers who should never of been in the profession because they didn't have a love for it but needed the money and a job. Lastly eduction should be based on sound educational learning theory and psychological theory. Children love to learn when it is fun and there is encouragement for effort, not just for achievement. In the end it is passion for something which results in real results.