Andy Parkes column: Here’s to the freedom to say what we think

In fact, I’ve found one question for social gatherings that leaves men completely unfazed but renders women entirely speechless. Perhaps I’ll tweet this one.

But, I now realise there is another question which one does not raise in polite company and that is: “How did you vote in the referendum?”

If you do forget yourself and commit this most damning social faux pas then you will receive a range of different reactions. The first will be silent horror as all present realise what you’ve done.

There will then follow a burble of embarrassed noises as everyone seeks to divert attention away from either themselves or the subject in general.

If you are then rude enough to pointedly demand a response from a particular individual, they will do one of two things – either lie or tell you the truth but whichever they do, they will tell you they voted to remain.

Why there is now such shame in admitting one voted to leave I’m not entirely clear.

The usual default human reaction is that it’s easier to side with the majority not the minority but on this particular thorny issue that definitely isn’t the case.

I have witnessed work colleagues who felt they couldn’t admit to the boss which way they voted, even though they didn’t know which box the boss himself had added his cross to.

I’m even aware of a few people who feel they can’t admit which way they voted to members of their own family.

That such a momentous decision for British voters was going to be divisive is obviously no surprise.

It is, however, highly distressing that so many people are made to feel such shame at exercising their democratic right.

The extent of the embarrassed reaction and level of discomfort felt over our decision to leave is obviously vastly different depending upon your location and the social mix in which you find yourself.

But whatever the situation, this remains a highly emotional question.

And, having spent time in Parliament recently, I can assure you our representatives, both elected and non-elected, are still as detached from the thinking of ordinary people on this subject as they have always been.

I’d like to take this opportunity to wish a happy new year to one and all. Here’s hoping you enjoyed a very pleasant and restful break and are entering into 2017 with a light heart and high hopes for the next 12 months.

I’m certainly looking forward to a new year with plenty of fresh challenges and new possibilities.

My overriding wish is that we all embrace the future, whatever it brings, and make the most of every opportunity.

I also hope we stop getting so quite so het up about the aforementioned Brexit, though I fear this maybe a forlorn hope.

We all live in a free society and enjoy freedom of speech – well, perhaps we do until the end of Culture Secretary Karen Bradley’s 10-week consultation on the future of Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act.

I don’t mind admitting I don’t envy her this one but even though she risks the considerable ire of Hacked Off and a number of MPs on both sides of the House, introducing 40 could see the collapse of many newspapers like this one.

Me even daring to mention Europe led to one writer saying: “I suppose you attend bullfights and consider foxes to be vermin?”

I’ve no idea what led them to this conclusion or why they felt it relevant, though for the record, I have attended a number of bullfights in both Spain and Portugal.

My personal preference is for the Portuguese version where the bull is allowed to live.

On the subject of foxes the answer is simpler, the writer is correct, they are vermin and need to be controlled.

I wouldn’t advocate hounds pulling them apart but I do strongly believe their numbers, particularly in urban areas, should be controlled in as humane a way as possible.

We control many other animals, with one form of culling or another, so I see no reason why foxes should be any different.

Here’s to some fresh thinking in 2017 and everyone being allowed to express their opinions openly.