Firstly, I would like to wish all readers a Happy New Year, and best wishes for the next twelve months. If 2016 was a year of debate and decision, then 2017 has to be the year of getting on with the job. In March we will formally start the process of leaving the European Union, which will be completed within two years. This means that by the spring of 2019, the UK will be outside of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and the European Commission. Britain will not put forward candidates to sit in the European Parliament, which will also be up for election in that year. I go into this debate, not with the rose tinted spectacles that it will all go without a hitch. Instead I will fight over the next two years for the best interests of everyone in Folkestone and Hythe, to make sure we get a deal that suits our interests. This should include a free trade agreement that keeps goods flowing freely through the Channel Tunnel and the Port of Dover, making sure that we avoid unnecessary delays in the movement of freight. I also want to make sure that we are outside of the Common Fisheries Policy, and instead have a system of local management for our inshore trawler fleet. I will be discussing this point, along with representatives from the trawlers who operate in Hythe Bay, at a special meeting at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs next week.
There is another major issue that both the government and parliament will need to address at the beginning of this year, and that is the regulation of press standards following the report produced by Lord Leveson in 2012. With a whole range of issues of massive importance before the country, it is more important than ever that we have a strong and free press, with the power to challenge and hold decision makers to account. When Lord Leveson produced his report he stated that any system of self regulation for the press had to be credible in the eyes both of the press and the public. It is clear that the system proposed in the legislation that was passed following the Leveson report, is not credible in the eyes of the press. This is because it is underpinned by a Royal Charter, that can be amended by a two thirds majority by the House of Commons. This creates a danger that parliament could try and regulate the press through the back door. Whilst a two thirds majority of parliament is not always easy to come by, there are many times, particularly on issues which arouse high emotion, that this has happened. I believe it would be wrong to use the threat of heavy economic sanctions which could be enforced by the courts to try threaten newspapers owners into signing up to a system of regulation that they fundamentally disagree with. That is hardly the environment that a free press should be made to work within. The newspaper industry has made progress in reforming the way it governs itself, and providing people with a proper system of redress if they get things wrong. Some will say that there is more that needs to be done, but I believe this is the path we should follow; one of genuinely independent self regulation.