Whilst it is certainly not my intention to become embroiled in party politics, or indeed comment on politics at all, I feel the need to draw readers’ attention to a report that the EU High Level Group on Media Freedom & Pluralism released recently.

The report is entitled “A free and pluralistic media to sustain European Democracy”.

There is one particular proposal which has been met with a frosty reception by the UK media, but before looking at that, it is worth noting the less publicised and perhaps less imminently important recommendations contained in the report, which have received little or no attention.

The High Level Group has produced many uncontroversial recommendations, for example that media literacy should be taught in schools, with a focus on pupils critically engaging with the role that the media plays in a democratic society; that a country having a ‘free media’ should be a pre-condition of EU membership; and that media organisations should make their codes of conduct publically available on their websites.

Like motherhood and apple pie, we can all agree with these worthy recommendations. But here’s the rub: controversially, the group recommends each member state should have their own independent media council, which would have the power to impose fines, make orders for the printing of apologies, and remove journalistic status.

Further, the councils should follow European-wide standards and, in the words of the report, “be monitored by the Commission to ensure that they comply with European values”.

In the current UK post-Leveson climate, where the UK’s membership of the European Union is already a prominent issue, it is not surprising that the recommendation has been met with a strong reaction.

Whatever your politics, it seems to be that if this recommendation were ever implemented, there would be potentially disastrous consequences for the freedom of the press in this country.

The UK press is currently in the process of establishing a robust system of self-regulation in the wake of the Leveson Report.  The press have fought hard to avoid a ‘statutory underpinning’ and the potential this could have for government intervention in the media.

Should just as strong a stand be made against the European Commission interfering in the way that our press is regulated? For most of us, the answer surely is a resounding “yes”.

And equally worrying is the mere fact that the EU High Level Group on Media Freedom & Pluralism could even issue such a recommendation.

Am I the only person to see the irony of a Group with such a grand name reaching this conclusion? Does this Group really represent EU thinking on freedom of expression? Surely it doesn’t – does it?