Remembrance Sunday symbolism

So once again, the debate about the poppy has raged over Remembrance weekend. Whether to wear one at all, whether it is being co-opted by politicians and the media, whether it glorifies war. I wear one – as far as I’m concerned, I don’t want to allow my feelings about what the British government is currently doing with our armed forces to get confused with the sacrifices made by those who served, and who serve now. These men and women are still someone’s sons and daughters, and just because the cause may be dubious, doesn’t mean I cannot show my respect for what they did, and my gratitude for family members safely returned. I am happy to take the risk that some politician wears his or her poppy because it’s good political currency. I don’t care why they wear theirs; I only know that I wear mine as a symbol of respect and remembrance for the victims of war, not the politics. Surely we don’t give up our symbols just because someone uses it in a way we don’t like? I’m not going to renounce the symbolism of the cross just because I hate the way some bigots use it to condemn and destroy. I don't doubt for a second that in the run-up to the 100th anniversary of the start of the First World War, the debate about the use of the poppy is going to be jacked up to unprecedented levels. But as long as my grandmother wears hers, I'll be wearing mine.

The boy wizard and the church that makes God just small enough to sit on your bookshelf.

I know this is a debate that is probably long gone, but I am really bored with Christians talking about how they think Harry Potter glorifies sorcery and is a bad influence on children. Particularly when they follow this up by declaring that they haven't read it. Yes he's a wizard. But if you bothered to actually look a bit more closely, you would see that it's more about friendship, love, growing up, and the pain in the butt of being at school. If only the church's biggest problem was a ten year old with a scar on his forehead. The idea that Harry Potter poses a threat to God is insulting. And even as a 32-year-old, anyone telling me I shouldn't read something because it's not good for me is tantamount to turning it into a giant blackforest gateau with my name on it. Get real. Your behaviour is a real turn-off. So no, the date from the Christian dating website did not go swimmingly.

House Schmouse

So it has been a while. I know that's bad. But I've been busy, ok? Although to be fair, this probably constitutes one of the busiest weeks I've had in a long time. I'm unexpectedly having to move house, there is nothing left to sit on in the flat, and my new housemate and I are now hauling ourselves around Bristol trying to find somewhere to live. And we've seen some corkers. The best was like stepping into a trippy dream. It was advertised as having a back yard, so I went through the house to the kitchen expecting to see a back door. Instead, the garden appeared to be a good floor's height below. When I asked the agent how you get to it, he then opened the little door to what I thought was the cupboard under the stairs. These carpeted steps lead down to... the bathroom. The steps came out right by the bath. The door to the backyard was next to the toilet. I don't think I've ever quite seen anything like it, and if I was still a student I think I'd have said screw it, lets move in. As it is, I'm too old to be walking the miles to the bathroom in the night. And what happens if you're having a garden party, someone's on the loo, and then someone arrives at the front door? You have to consider these things. Needless to say, we're not getting that one. I thought I'd start posting some of the pictures people put online, apparently to try and lure you in. This is today's favourite, just so you can see what the toilet looks like. No photos of the bedrooms I hasten to add. Surely not a good sign.

It's not looking good for Duane Buck

In the wake of Troy Davis' execution, it's business as usual in Texas. And things are not looking good for Duane Buck. On the surface, the press coverage of the suspension of his execution in Texas for the 1995 murder of his ex-girlfriend and her lover sounds promising – the US Supreme Court in Washington has agreed to hear his case for a new sentencing hearing.

During the original hearing, psychiatrist Walter Quijano said black people are more likely to re-offend than whites. In Texas, after a person has been convicted, the jury is asked two questions: are there mitigating circumstances as to why this person may have committed this crime, and secondly, and most importantly in this case, is this person a future danger. Saying he’s a future danger because he is black is unconstitutional – the law says race should in no way influence the judicial system.

But what’s really not good is that of the five other cases where this particular psych used the racial argument, all five were granted a new sentencing hearing – and all five were sentenced to death again. It seems no one doubts Buck’s guilt, and so the only alternative outcome is life without parole. Better to do life in Huntsville than fester until the needle at Polunsky? Certainly, most would say. Certainly good to get a sentencing hearing that is itself fair under the constitution.

It’s also worth pointing out that the current senator of Texas, Rick Perry, refused to grant Buck a new hearing – it took the granting of a certiorari petition to the Supreme Court to get this one looked at, and they could quite easily refuse a re-sentencing and clear the way for another execution date. But if Rick Perry can sit back and allow what appears to be blatant racism prejudice a trial, what is he going to gloss over in the White House? We’ve lived through one cowboy's time on Pennsylvania Avenue. Maybe the publicity surrounding this case might throw some light on what we can expect from another.

Don't worry there's still one prince left

Ok. I've managed to hold this off so far, but I think it's about time to reveal the sheer quality of my Royal Wedding mug.

I managed to persuade myself that as I don't knit, there's no point in having the 'knit your own Royal Family', but as you can see, the mug was beyond my powers of resistance.

Finally, I'm not the only older sibling to be outdone by a ginger younger brother.

Celyn Vincent's case makes no sense, morally or economically.

Whether the family of Celyn Vincent are suffering because of Tory cuts, or whether the possibility of her being put into care is due to the already-established system in the UK, surely the case of the Vincent family should make the current government think twice about cutting care for the disabled.

Celyn's mother Riven, who was visited by David Cameron before the election, says she can no longer cope with the round-the-clock care that her daughter needs. Gloucestershire Council are alleged to have refused any more help - the family currently gets six hours a week - and with the lack of ringfencing around funds supposedly meant for improving respite provision for kids with disabilities and their families, councils may well dip into the pot for other things.

David Cameron had a disabled child. He knows what it's like, or at least that's what you'd think. News reports say he's going to write to Riven Vincent personally. That's great. But as Riven Vincent says herself, what about the other thousands of families who are in exactly the same position?

I'm no economist, and I can only hope that the government knows something I don't. Could someone explain to me how families being forced to put their kids into respite care, full time, costs less than the authorities providing support for a child to live at home, with people who love them and friends and family who can help with looking after them? Surely creating a situation where institutionalisation is the only option is the exact opposite of the 'Big Society' idea that the Tories seem to be so proud of?

We seem to have finished filming. I'm not going to count my chickens, but it looks like I've done my last night shift for the time being, and am more or less back in Bristol, at least until the middle of January.

I'm quite impressed that the students have got out on the streets. Obviously no one wants to be hit on the head by a fire extinguisher, but nevertheless it's good to see them marching past the BBC. Apparently one had a sign saying 'First Dobby's dead, now this?!'. Ten points for good old English self-deprecation.

But how can the government realistically say they can't find the money for education any more, when they're letting companies like Vodafone and the ultra-rich like Philip Green slip through the legal loopholes? I was a student, I paid fees, and now I pay taxes. He was a student, he didn't pay fees, and now he doesn't pay taxes. Talk about a bunch of rich kids pulling the ladder up once they've got what they need. Yes universities need more funding. But surely there are other possibilities. That's the last time I vote Liberal Democrat.