It seems that the Metropolitan Police has turned to Google to place adverts on the internet calling for people to report suspected Right Wing Extremists - and the advert is directing people to the Met Police’s anti-terrorism web pages.

For reasons which are more “gut instinct” than intellectual, I feel really uncomfortable with that.

Surely we live in a free society, and while I personally think hard-right wing political and social views be very yeugh-inducing, I also strongly believe that people have a right to hold whatever views they want. So long as you stay within the law of the land - you can think the world is flat, evolution is false and that Stalin was just misunderstood for all I care. Equally, I expect to be allowed to challenge your views through debate and argument.

I can certainly understand the police wanting to encourage people to report crimes to them - but is holding far-right political views now a crime in the UK?

Would the police (indeed, ARE the police) running adverts headlined with “Muslim Terrorist - Suspect it? Report it. Your call could be vital to us.” How about “Communist Sympathiser - Suspect it? Report it. Your call could be vital to us.”

Again, I can’t put into a detailed intellectual debate why I am uncomfortable with that Google advert, but the discomfort was undeniably heightened by the fact that it appeared on my own blog, specifically the “about me” page, where I comment on my Libertarian political views. Google adverts are targeted by keyword, so someone in the Met Police (or their ad agency) chose what words appearing on a web page should trigger the displaying of the advert - and evidently my combination of political terms set off some sort of alarm and resulted in the advert appearing.

This is just something which makes me very uncomfortable and just feels wrong for the police to be doing in a democratic society.

Last night I attended a speech by Business Secretary Lord Mandelson who outlined a new policy of boosting the UK economy though revamping how the government works and try to assist businesses to function in the current economic climate.

Most of it was fairly sensible stuff, if delivered in a rather dull monotone voice - but there were a couple of slight jokes.

Considering the media fuss going on right now about his plans to fix the Post Office - one was quite topical.

He commented that Tony Blair had once said that Nu Labour would have completed its modernisation when it has come to love Peter Mandelson.

Since he has been back in government, he has felt somewhat discomforted to find himself being liked by his parliamentary colleagues. So he decided to shake up the Post Office knowing that it would annoy the back-benchers and result in a return to the conventional loathing he is so used to from the Labour Party.

I read this morning that the Communication Workers Union (CWU) will ask its 250,000 members to approve a formal split from the Labour party if the shake up of the post office goes ahead.

His speech was video’d and will be available on the RSA website in a few days - but to be honest, it’s not that interesting to listen to unless you are really into politics or run a business, or like monotone dialogue.

Like them or loathe them - but at least Tony Blair and David Cameron sound interesting, even if what they are saying isn’t.

Last night was the last of this year’s free lectures at the RSA - and I am looking forward to next year with excitement. For the occasional dud (see above), the majority are really interesting, and being free to attend means even the dull ones don’t leave you feeling “out of pocket”.

Am off to the RSA this evening to listen to Lord Mandy of Dodgy Mortgage give a talk about boosting the British economy and it seems that the talk is proving popular as I had an email earlier this week asking if I wasn’t going to go could I let them know as there is quite a long waiting list for any last minute tickets.

Like most politicians, he is one of those who generates mixed feelings. He certainly deserved the mantle of the Prince of Darkness when spinning for Tony Blair, but since he went to Brussels as EU Trade Commissioner, he has actually proven to be a very capable negotiator and I gather quite good at the job.

Considering how long these things can take to arrange, I would suspect that the talk was set up when he was plain Mr. Mandelson Esq. and lost in Brussels - but as he is now in government as Peter, the Lord Mandelson - I suspect that the talk might have been cleaned up a bit to make it compliant with government spin. Which will be a shame, but I do actually try to catch important political speeches when they are broadcast on the rolling news channels as the 10 second clip shown on the 6pm news is rarely the best bit.

I had another email this morning though, as it seemed that there are some last minute tickets to tomorrows recording of Have I Got News for You, and long term readers may recall that I am a huge fan of the program so replied instantly and got four tickets. Normally, I have to queue up for at least an hour to secure a decent seat - but these are “priority tickets” so I am guaranteed a decent seat this time - woo!

To add to the woo - it is being presented by Jeremy Clarkson, who is usually quite good on this show, although I personally can’t stand Top Gear since they rebranded it as a TV version of Nuts magazine.

As an aside, there is a column in The Spectator written by a Jeremy Clark about his life and for ages I misread that as Jeremy Clarkson and was convinced that behind his blokish public image is a highly cultured character who enjoys fine food and socialising. Opps!

Over the past few weeks, I have been re-watching the House of Cards Trilogy on DVD again.

It’s one of those great political drams, but my views of the series changed over time as the programs themselves changed.

In part 1, we are the co-conspirators – jointly plotting the downfall of the PM and we glory in our successes as we work together to defeat the other politicians. It is a marriage of equals – and we feel as if we are the Prime Minister at the end. We won.

In part 2, we are just a confidant – the new PM’s best friend, but no longer “one of the guys”. Francis turns to us when he needs to, but we are no longer a player in his plots, just a bystander. We wonder what we did to get so distant and the confusion discomforts us. Something has been lost and we ache for the comfort of the older statesman.

In part 3, he tells us his story of the Cyprus problem and we find out later on that he had lied to us about it. He spurns us like a forgotten harlot and turns back to his wife for help.

And we do not forgive him his betrayal.

In a way, the final series is a bad way to finish the series as we feel left out of the fun - being a mere bystander now, and frankly I personally have never been a huge fan of gratuitous sex on TV, which the 3rd series has fair bit of.

Nonetheless I do love the series and the DVDs also have some interesting commentaries - such as the moment where the late much lamented Ian Richardson was introduced to Susannah Harker’s father, who was younger than he was - causing a bit of embarrassment about the kissing scenes!

Also, the infamous "You may very well think that; I couldn’t possibly comment" saying was never specifically designed as a catchphrase and it wasn’t until the program was shown that they realised what they had created.

Been a busy few days - went to talks this evening and yesterday evening. Considering that I normally work in the evenings, these nights out result in coming home and having to put in an extra hour or two before crashing.

Last night was a long planned wander over to the Post Office Archive for a talk about the infamous Post Office underground railway - more affectionately known as the Mail Rail. There was a showing of a 10 minute video made in 1987 to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the railway - and then a talk about the Archive’s curator.

To be honest, he didn’t really say a lot I didn’t already know - but it was good to have a refresher course to remind me of what I knew.

However - he mentioned a report compiled in 1911 to promote the railway and it went into a lot of detail about the earlier pneumatic based post office railway. I didn’t know about that document and shall have to wander back to the Archive centre to have a read as it could be quite helpful for my own researches.

This evening though - I wandered along to the LSE in Holborn for an "in conversation" type talk with Cherie Blair, wife of our former Prime Minister. Cherie Blair is undeniably one of those people who elicit very strong reactions in most people. I certainly veer towards the "heads in hands in despair" opinion about her time when in 10 Downing St., but I have a lot of respect for her work as a lawyer and human rights campaigner.

Incidentally, I go to so many events where I am often one of the youngest people in the room, but this evening I was in a room where probably two-thirds of the people were younger than myself. Makes a change!

The first two thirds of the evening was basically Howard Davies of the LSE in chat with Cherie Blair and talking mainly about her life and anecdotes about being the wife of a national leader. In all, very amusing stuff and worth listening to - along with the odd bit of politics thrown in.

Who the heck voted Tony Blair as gay hunk of the week - although he was apparently quite flattered by the decision!

The final bit was questions from the audience, and we got a bit more human rights discussed, which was a very interesting to hear her views on. There was a book signing event afterwards, but to be honest, I doubt I would read the book if I had brought a copy, the reviews put me off a bit. I also prefer my political books to be by the politicians themselves.

Cherie Blair is one of those people who can command huge prices for public speaking - so it was a rare treat to be able to hear her opinions for free.

Despite some very tempting options, I’m going to try and avoid the lecture circuit tomorrow - I need a night off