I heard someone say the other day, that you don't see public informationbroadcasts any more. I could hardly believe my ears, nothing could befurther from the true. Admittedly they may not be delivered straight tocamera by a presenter with a plumb voice any more, but that's what makesthem so pervasive. The BBC reported recently that government spending onadvertising had increased by 40% in the past year alone(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8514798.stm). Now, I would not wish to suggest that government advertising should bestopped all together. Undoubtedly there have been some very effective publicinformation campaigns in the past, but the volume of these is getting out ofcontrol. It is not uncommon to see two or three government advertisements ina single commercial break. The fact that some people don't realise there areso many is what I find worrying. Because the advertising agencies haveadopted modern techniques, many people fail to spot that these aregovernment advertisements. Recently we have been told how to blow our nose;that we must get our tax returns in on time; to tax our cars; pay ourtelevision licences; that benefit cheats will be caught; that we can attendcourses to improve our maths and so many more. I'm sure it is a boon to the commercial television companies who arestruggling to find advertising revenue at the moment, but if the governmentwants to subsidise ITV companies with taxpayers money they should do soopenly. On Sunday I listened to a moving and impressive speech by Anne Diamond, inwhich she spoke of her campaign in the eighties to encourage mothers to puttheir babies to sleep on their backs and reduce the risk of cot death. Thisis of course an example of an excellent campaign, but what worried me wasthe fact that when government took on the campaign, it allocated a budget of£2million. It would surely have been possible to do the same job, for alower cost. If only more civil servants in Whitehall spent public money asif it was their own this country would be much wealthier. So not only does the nanny state insist on telling us what to eat, how muchto drink, and not to smoke, but it also feel the need to shout it at the topof its public funded lungs, meaning that we are bombarded with television adverts, radio commercials, and leaflets which we ourselves are paying for.