A straw poll of colleagues and friends established a ready consensus. The story of Britain 1995 was the tale of three strong women and a weak Prime Minister.
Reluctance to admit fascination with Britain's ongoing royal soap obliges some to place Mr John Major's leadership gamble at the head of the year's memorable events. But he faced stiff competition from that Panorama interview. Had it not been for Diana's decision to go public, the events surrounding the celebration and commemoration of VE Day would have run him a close second.
As it is, the weeks post-Panorama have witnessed a strong rally by the House of Windsor - courtesy of a hip replacement and a display of personal courage of the kind which ensures a nation's undying affection for Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother. And that was before last week's dramatic palace coup.
Baroness Thatcher celebrated her 70th birthday in Britain and America. And for some, perhaps, Mr Major's attendance at one party and Mrs Nancy Reagan's at the other evoked memories of a more golden political era. Certainly the luckless prime minister found the comparisons drawn once again, as three equally strong women provided the dominant images of his fifth year in power.
Would Maggie have allowed the younger royals to make such a mess of things? Could the Princess have secretly plotted her shattering attack on the monarchy when the Iron Lady was at the height of her powers? Should not the prime minister have intervened earlier, demanding that the Queen insist - as finally she did - upon divorce and an end to the war of the Waleses?
When news of her majesty's intervention broke late last Wednesday night, the reaction was typically begrudging. Some Westminister watchers simply marvelled at the queen's timing, and the convenience of another royal chapter to blow news of the government's end-of-term disarray off the front pages. Yet again, it was hard not to feel sorry for Mr Major. If anything could go wrong, it would. If the blame could be laid at the door of Number 10, his critics would pile it high.
They were inevitably going to do so after the local elections in Scotland, England and Wales. Mr Major and his accident-prone party chairman, Mr Jeremy Hanley, had helped to take a leaf out of Mr Kenneth Bake's book, discount their prospects sufficiently in advance, and turn any unexpected successes to presentational advantage. There were no unexpected successes. But nothing had prepared the Tories for the humiliation inflicted upon them by the Scottish electorate on April 6. "Fanciful nonsense" was Chancellor Kenneth Clarke's description of Labour's devolution proposals, in what must rank among the most ill-considered political comments since Mr Norman Lamont regretted nothing and spotted the green shoots of economic recovery. Scotland's response was to inflict a total Tory wipe-out. The "party of the Union" failed to wind control of any of the 29 new local authorities, saw just 79 candidates returned for the 1,161 seats contested and trailed home an ignominious fourth place, behind the Liberal Democrats.
The trail of devastation spread the length and breadth of England and Wales a month later, as the map of local government power in Britain was redrawn. Wales followed Scotland's example, while "Disgusted of Tonbridge Wells" joined Essex man in revolt.
THE days before polling saw a celebrated dispute over BBC plans to give live coverage to Labour's special Clause Four conference, when Mr Tony Blair finally ditched Labour's "historic" commitment to public ownership. Tory fears were more than justified. "New Labour" celebrated its greatest triumph in almost 30 years, while jubilant Liberal Democrats pushed through the magic 5000-seat barrier. With just 25 per cent of the vote, it was the governing party's worst ever result. But despite the loss of some 2000 seats, a game Mr Hanley insisted there were no implications for Mr Major's leadership.
Indeed Mr Major issued a brief "business as usual" assurance before immersing himself in a five-day series of VE Day celebrations which took him from London to Paris, Moscow and Berlin. But normal business had been terminated in Tory Britain. The game was up for Mr Hanley. And Mr Major sensed the time was fast approaching when he should risk all and defy his critics to put up or shut up.
He delivered his ultimatum on June 22. .at a press conference in the Downing Street garden. Mr John Redwood promptly resigned as Welsh Secretary to take up the challenge "Redwood versus Deadwood" groaned the Sun, as the Tory press savoured the prospect of a second-round battle between the two Michaels.
In the end it never materialised. Mr Major stitched up a deal which would make Mr Heseltine Deputy Prime Minister and First Secretary of State. "Friends" of Mr Portillo busied themselves establishing a campaign headquarters. But the darling of the right faltered, and in the subsequent reshuffle found himself successfully stitched up at the Ministry of Defence.
Once again Mr Major had benefited from not being somebody else. Anybody else spell an ideological heave and consequent bloodbath. The unity pitch worked - but only just.
Estimates varied, but the general consensus had been that a rebellion by anything approaching a third of the parliamentary party would render Mr Major's position untenable. A "technical" victory under the rules wouldn't suffice. Reliable sources say Mr Major shared this assessment on the morning of the crucial July 4 vote. But by teatime senior ministers had bolstered the prime minister. And a well-rehearsed stratagem saw him claim a "clear-cut" victory as his detractors, and the media, hesitated.
In fact more than a third of his MPs - 111 - had denied Mr Major their support. While he beat Mr Redwood by 218 to 89 votes, Lord Tebbit observed that this indeed fell into what had previously been considered the grey area. Transport minister Steve Norris had confirmed as much in advance, saying anything less than 230 would see Mr Major in trouble. Had his vote fallen by 10, the story of the Conservative leadership battle might have been very different. As it was, the message appeared to be of leadership - but not authority - restored.
BATTERED and bruised by allegations of "sleaze", Tory rebels last month joined with Labour to inflict a damaging defeat on Mr Major over the Nolan recommendations on disclosure of earnings from parliamentary consultancies. Just last week, they heaped humiliation upon the hurt - defeating Mr Major again, this time on European fishing policy.
Labour rejoiced as the government's year ended as it had begun - in division and disarray, its capacity and very will for survival once more in doubt.
Though there is yet time, Chancellor Clarke's modest tax cut hasn't generated an obvious feelgood factor. And Labour's opinion poll lead appears undiminished by Mr Major's dark warnings of constitutional ruin to come. Rumour has it that Conservative Central Office is on "amber alert" for a snap autumn poll. If the Grim Reaper continues to take his toll, it may come to that.
But before then, the Tories face still more local elections - this time defending seats won in the aftermath of their 1992 general election victory. Experts say the results next May could be just as devastating as last. Dark murmurings persist that it might not yet be too late to bring on Hezza. The majority of MPs think it is, and confirmation of a growing mood of weary resignation may perhaps he found in the expectation that record numbers of them will stand down come the general election. A year, of course, is an eternity in the life of Mr Major's government. But the bookmakers are likely to offer better odds on Prince Charles's long-term career prospects. Diana's Panorama critique was sensationally wounding. Polls suggest many agree with her implied suggestion that the succession should pass directly to Prince William. Britons have difficulty with the concept of an ongoing relationship between the Prince and Mrs Camilla Parker Bowles and Diana seems guaranteed her wish to remain a Queen of people's hearts.
Against that, the Establishment last week confided to the British public what they had known all along - that the separation was the precursor to a divorce, and that Diana will not be queen. For the moment at least, Charles appears to rule out remarriage. But time is of the essence in the conditioning and preparation of the popular mood. On the assumption that the queen emulates her mother, and will reign for many years to come, many royal pundits believe time, together with British instinct and tradition, will work to Charles's advantage.
All three characteristics were on display on that memorable May day when the Queen, the Queen Mother, and Princess Margaret re-enacted the scenes of 50 years before and took the salute on the Buckingham Palace balcony. Their sternest tabloid critics rejoiced at the display of what British royalty still does best. And the message - one Mr Major might yearn for - was unmistakable. Continuity.