Ofcom is in the midst of hiring 150 new tech and cybersecurity staff at a new hub in Manchester, in a significant expansion for the regulator which employs around 1,000 staff to regulate TV, the postal system and telecoms and mobile phone services.

Such a workforce will be needed to enforce powers that could allow it to dish out multi-billion pound fines of up to 10pc of social media company’s annual turnover – or put its executives in jail for two years – if they fail to banish illegal content at pace.

Still, those powers are only effective if they can be enforced. With social media companies holding the deepest knowledge of their algorithms and the vast cash reserves to fund lengthy legal battles, Ofcom faces a huge challenge.

Julian Knight, the culture committee’s chairman, asked whether Grade was “prepared for the fight”, as Meta was seen to be “lawyering up” in anticipation of Ofcom’s new role. 

“We have to be,” he responded. “The recruitment [at Ofcom] is going extremely well. Including one or two high flyers from the tech companies. 

“A major priority is to ensure that we are going to be a match for these companies. One of the provisions in the bill is the power to demand information. Nobody has that power. We have to recruit people who are able to understand that information.”

Yet, he is also wise to Ofcom’s limitations: “We may not be able to poach people with financial incentives that are earning millions of dollars in Silicon Valley. 

“But, for an organisation like ours, we will need to identify up-and-comers with the right experience who we can train up and have good basic knowledge. Hopefully, we will be a nursery for huge talent in this area.”

Given his propensity to spout forthright views, Grade’s challenge may come from finding a way to burnish the regulator’s strength without straying from its reputation for making sober, impartial, decisions based on the evidence.

While executive chairman of ITV in 2008, he described the video-sharing website YouTube as a “parasite” that feeds off the content produced by broadcasters. 

He has also openly criticised workers at Ofcom, branding them “woke warriors” after they launched an investigation into the Talking Pictures TV decision to broadcast seventies comedy Rogue’s Rock that featured a white actor wearing black make up.

Despite expressing divisive views on the woke debate, the BBC licence fee and his backing of Channel 4 privatisation, Grade said he would have no trouble leaving those opinions behind.

“Ofcom’s enviable reputation as a regulator is based on their processes, their adjudications – their decisions are based on evidence and research,” he said. “And therefore you leave your opinions at the door when you arrive at Ofcom. You have to leave your opinions at the door.”

Perhaps the most potent weapon Grade can lean on is his previous skirmishes with the regulator. While he may not harbour extensive knowledge on the inner workings of social media platforms, his many battles with Ofcom when in charge of the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 has handed him significant strategic knowledge of what it feels like to be on the other side.

For Grade, his success will be judged on how seriously the tech companies are taking Ofcom in three years’ time. 

“[The tech companies] will begin to understand that lip service to responsibility is no longer acceptable,” he said. “But it won’t happen overnight. This a long haul to put this right”. 

Anti-woke campaigners part of ‘thoughtful and lively debate’, says Lord Grade

Anti-woke campaigners are an important part of “thoughtful and lively debate” in Britain, Lord Grade said, as he repeated his fierce criticism of the BBC and the liberal left following his appointment as Ofcom chairman. 

The Conservative peer said describing the BBC licence fee as regressive was not an opinion but a “statement of fact” and that he admired the actor turned woke critic Laurence Fox for “his courage in speaking out”. 

However, the former BBC chairman said he did not like the “strident tone” of the woke debate in Britain, as he was scrutinised by MPs on the Culture committee ahead of taking up the £142,500-a-year role. 

Rebutting questions over his ability to remain impartial at Ofcom despite his forthright views and seasoned broadcasting career, he added: “Ofcom’s enviable reputation as a regulator is based on their processes, their adjudications – their decisions are based on evidence and research.

“And therefore you leave your opinions at the door when you arrive at Ofcom. You have to leave your opinions at the door.”

His appointment comes after a process to find a suitable candidate to chair the watchdog, which oversees broadcasting and telecommunications in the UK, has faced a series of delays since it began two years ago.