Such pessimistic thoughts have been buried as Mr Grade prepares at last to embrace Auntie in a match made by Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell, who, after a selection process supervised by the Commissioner for Public Appointments, Dame Rennie Fritchie, called Mr Grade “the right man at the right time”. And Mr Right himself vowed to make sure that “the provision of universally-available, value-for-money, public-service broadcasting is neither jeopardised nor marginalised”.

This journal agrees with Ms Jowell’s evaluation of the new broom and recalls from nine years ago Mr Grade’s observations on the BBC in these pages. In conversation with Geoffrey Goodman, the then chief executive of Channel 4 said: “The BBC is a great cultural institution and any idea of the BBC becoming a business is a denial of what that institution should be about. The BBC is an idea... and once it ceases to be an idea, a great idea, and becomes a business, then the BBC will lose out; and it will lose out at the expense of the licence-fee payer, who will have to pick up the bill for failure.” In that same conversation, Mr Grade also bemoaned what he described as the BBC’s overreaction to political pressure. Reading the full text of the interview would considerably cheer those now involved in restoring the Corporation to its rightful place in world esteem.

But even before the sound of the pealing bells that greeted Mr Grade’s betrothal had faded there came an unwelcome wedding present in the shape of an interim report on public service broadcasting (PSB) from Ofcom, the new media regulator. Among other things, this challenges the BBC to assert itself as a standard-setter for excellence in programming, and to strive for public service content in every broadcast – and it proposes that the licence fee might be shared out among other broadcasters to encourage publicservice productions.

Some broadcasters see the review as foreshadowing an Ofcom ambition to seize control of the BBC’s public-service remit during the negotiations over the new BBC charter. “Ofcom has parked its tanks right in the middle of the BBC’s lawn,” was the judgement of Peter Bazalgette, chairman of the Endemol UK production company which supplies the BBC with shows such as Ready, Steady, Cook, Ground Force and Changing Rooms. Melvyn Bragg, Granada’s Controller of Arts, asked: “Is Ofcom telling us that it is in the business of ordering what sorts of programmes broadcasters ought to make?”

The BJR is not directly concerned with the anxieties of producers of lifestyle TV, The South Bank Show or, for that matter, with drama, comedy or quizzes. But the panel that prepared the report was chaired by Ed Richards, Ofcom’s senior partner, strategy & market developments (in the curious nomenclature which gives a public servant a title better suited to a stockbroker). Mr Richards was quick to deny any intention to dictate programming, saying his interim report was simply a contribution to public debate. “During the rest of this year Ofcom will continue to conduct its review of PSB, and the debate about the BBC’s 10-year charter will gather speed, with the outcome determined, as it should be, by Parliament,” he declared – the Communications Act, which created Ofcom, also gave it the task of examining public service broadcasting and its duty to inform, educate and entertain.

Innocent and constitutional though his intentions undoubtedly are, Mr Richards is not someone to be taken lightly. To quote the biography of him issued by Ofcom, he used to be “senior policy advisor to the Prime Minister for media, telecoms, internet and e-govt. Before that he was controller of corporate strategy at the BBC”. In other words, his most recent past attachments were to Tony Blair and John Birt.

Much depends on how Mr Grade and his fellow governors handle the challenge from Ofcom. It would be natural for them to look into the long term, and concentrate their efforts on finding a mutually-agreeable basis for the new charter; it would also be natural for them to try to keep Ofcom at arm’s length, if not farther away than they can throw it. Potentially, BBC journalism would be maimed if it were put under an additional layer of scrutiny and regulation after the Hutton report and the much-disliked internal inquiry conducted as a result. Time has not made the conclusions reached by Hutton more acceptable to the public in general, gratifying though they must have been to the Government, and there is likely to be little demand outside Westminster for a blood-letting of BBC news executives.

Although the conflict in Iraq will continue to hang like a dust cloud over the political landscape in Britain, in spite of Government efforts to distract attention from it, it is a news story like others. Media of all kinds will report it, sometimes with bias, sometimes without, until editors get bored or managers win the argument about costs. But the public is about to be engulfed in a sandstorm of ignorance, prejudice, self-interest, misinformation, disinformation, spin, innuendo and lies, all because of the referendum on the European constitution. Newspapers have already marched into their prepared positions, and will not be budged. For the voter who intends to understand the question before entering the polling booth, the only useful source of information is likely to be the BBC, where there are journalists who have the knowledge. The BBC’s coverage of the referendum campaign will, if properly conducted, inform and educate. But will it entertain? Happy honeymoon, Mr Grade.