THE name might not mean much to you. On the other hand it might mean a lot. Edward Mirzoeff.

To those who keep an eye on the credits wrapping up TV programmes, Mirzoeff's name has been a seal on television of the highest quality for more than 30 years. A documentary producer, Mirzoeff made all the classic John Betjeman programmes. It was his idea to put 'Betj' in a helicopter - an unlikely pairing - for the documentaries which looked at the English house, everything from tower blocks to Castle Howard, and explored the coast. A memorable moment in the latter was the final shot from a scan of a Butlin's holiday camp - the camera pulling away from a close up of girls on a big wheel. Betjeman mused: "I'm glad I've been to Butlin's; it's really been such fun. There's some of it in all us - or nearly every one."

In his 38 years with the Beeb, Mirzoeff, whose most recent major production was the Elizabeth R series, has deservedly collected almost as many awards. But he has lately been reduced to covering for other producers' absences. So next month he is quitting, taking with him a proposed series on 20th Century architecture, which his employers have turned down.

Mirzoeff's troubles explain why I, for one, now watch the BBC a good deal less. The Beeb has demoted the well-crafted off-centre documentary in favour of format series like Changing Rooms.

The headline-making defection of Des Lynam was largely to do with money - the Beeb's inability to buy the sports coverage that Lynam fronts. Mirzoeff's departure is a far more telling indicator of change, and decline, at the BBC. There is little doubt that Mirzoeff would make a brilliant job of chronicling and assessing 20th Century architecture. It would make compulsive viewing for all interested in the world around them - the world we have made. Perhaps, like me, you'll look out for it on Channel 4, which now screens many of the best feature documentaries. Such programmes once virtually defined what the BBC was about. In turning its back on them, the BBC should not be surprised if, when the chips are finally down, it struggles to find friends to help it fight its corner.

The Daily Telegraph publishes many unbelievable letters. They are a startling but important reminder that some of our citizens have yet to enter the 20th Century, let alone stand at the portal of the 21st (for we haven't quite arrived there yet, have we?). Tony Blair's choice of dress for the St Paul's service honouring the Queen Mother, brought this incredible response from PD King-Fretts, of South Molton, Devon:

"The Prime Minister's turnout at St Paul's spoke volumes about the man. To arrive in a lounge suit when he well knew that people were expected to wear morning dress was a deliberate and crude insult to those present, to the nation, and, in particular, to the great lady herself."

You will note that this correspondent wasn't merely criticising Blair's appearance, but suggesting he chose it deliberately to insult the Queen Mother. It's a sobering thought that to PD King-Fretts and doubtless others, the complete disappearance of the morning suit would probably signal the end of 'Great' Britain. To others among us, though sadly not enough, it might mark a modest beginning.

'A travesty of justice." "A charter for criminals." An encouragement to "devil worship" and "drug parties." What, pray, is this ghastly, dangerous thing? All these fears were raised in a House of Lords debate on the Right to Roam. But think - the speakers, one for each of those preposterous predictions, are up there ruling over us. We should be weeping really.