Labour now against any land sales at all?

October 2nd, 2010 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

Fuck they are getting more desperate. The latest in the Dom Post:

is set to ratchet up the debate over sales of land to foreign investors, with figures showing the equivalent of 122 rugby fields of Kiwi farmland are approved for sale to foreign investors each day.

I assume that a rugby field is around equal to a hectare. So NZ has around 27  million rugby fields to sell. Over a year (assuming working days) that is 30 hectares sold, or around 0.1% of total land.

Over a decade, that would be a massive 1% sold. Oh fuck, how the hell would we cope with only the remaining 99%?

Even worse, by the year 3000 all the land may be gone. Well, only if you ignore that those overseas purchasers also sell their land eventually – sometimes back to NZ owners.

And in the past five years, 219 of the 222 applications lodged for a foreign purchase have been approved.

“Let’s send a clear message: We welcome your investment, but there are some things we don’t want your investment in and land is one of those,” Labour leader said.

Past five years? Hmmn. Who was in Government for most of that time? In fact who was the Minister in charge of promoting into New Zealand? One Phil Goff?

Is there anything he will not turn his back on, in a desperate bid for relevance? Does he actually have a single core belief?

Labour sold NZ land at the rate of almost 300 rugby fields a working day – at three times the rate of sales under National.

So when exactly did Phil Goff decide this was wrong? When he was out there as Trade Minister encouraging foreign purchases of land?

Can he point to some memos he wrote as a Minister, pleading with his colleagues to clamp down on land sales?

Some 158,588 hectares was approved for sale – equivalent to about 591ha a week or 122 rugby fields every day since July 2005.

Of that 160,000 hectares Phil sold 130,000 of it, and National has sold just 30,000. Actually the land owners sold it, so talking about the Governments that approved it.

Also under Labour, Canadian pop star Shania Twain was allowed to buy 24,731 hectares of high country near Wanaka. Mr Goff admitted he was uncomfortable with the 2005 sale to Twain, although it had included many conditions and some sweeteners for the country

Really – prove it? Where are your memos and file notes, expressing your discomfort and arguing against it?

Tags: , , ,

45 Responses to “Labour now against any land sales at all?”

  1. MT_Tinman (2,791 comments) says:

    How many of those hectares sold are actually taken home by the buyers?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Michaels (1,317 comments) says:

    On Shania Twain’s property, I remember very clearly one Mz Clark showing off on the walking track infront of the cameras. Infact, and I may be wrong, but wasn’t one Mr. Phil Goff there as well full of smiles??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. reid (15,541 comments) says:

    “Does he actually have a single core belief?”

    Of course he does. He wants to win, at any cost, regardless of what that means to us, the people he’s supposed to be serving. Mind you, this is what his whole stinking party think, as well, so you can hardly blame him, alone.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    This constant argument that “you can’t take it away” is totally fallacious. Land should never be allowed to be sold to anyone other than citizens or permanent residents of your country. Will someone who is in favour of land sales tell me what is wrong with leasing? I wonder why the Chinese don’t allow us to buy their land? Hmmmm.

    Businesses acquiring land is how the Belgian empire got the Congo , the English got India, and the Dutch East India Company got Indonesia.

    Also the “money” that the Chinese are awash with is no better than Disney dollars. Trillions of dollars created out of thin air by the USA and Europe propping up failed financial systems. Give it 150 years for this to go through the system a few times and it will make the beads and blankets of the 1840′s in NZ look like a good deal.

    Look around the world and see the problems this issue creates. In Ireland:

    “Land, and the ownership of land, was to dominate Ireland’s history in the Nineteenth Century. The problems caused by who owned the land was partly responsible for the terrible impact of the Great Famine from 1845 to 1847. Gladstone attempted to resolve the land issue but by the end of the Nineteenth Century not a great deal had been done which specifically improved the lifestyle of those who worked on the land.”

    Full article is worth a read and can be found here:

    http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/ireland_%20land_%20problems.htm

    Yes Goff truly is a hypocrite of the highest order and totally unsupportable. Labour will never get my vote back while he is at the helm. He will win quite a bit of support though if he goes through with this as election policy. If he promised to abolish the ETS as well he might actually be a threat to Key. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. bhudson (4,720 comments) says:

    kaya,

    Goff could no more promise to the Labour faithful to abolish ETS theft, than he could promise to repeal civil unions. On that score we are completely safe.

    There are, of course, many other lies he can conjure up. His pretence at leadership is one. That the party and parliamentary caucus are united behind him in dealing with Carter is another. That messing with GST legislation is a good thing is yet another. That he is in any way capable of improving our economy or country – well that is starkly obvious.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. burt (7,085 comments) says:

    DPF

    You know how it works. It’s like decreasing income tax and increasing GST – It’s OK when Labour do it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. wat dabney (3,461 comments) says:

    Fascistic Blood & Soil policies.

    One wonders how much more mileage Labour plans to extract from racism and xenophobia.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    What really gets up my nose, we pay this prick and for what. He’s not an opposition’s arsehole.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. jaba (2,068 comments) says:

    h y p o c r i t e .. not just Goff but all the Labour MP’s who were Ministers in the last Govt .. talk about desperate Dan. What next for goodness sake?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “Does he actually have a single core belief?”

    As Reid says, he wants to win. After he has “won” he wants to turn NZ into a totalitarian socialist state. If only John Key’s National party had the balls to openly oppose this ambition. They’re too frightened to even say that socialism is a bad thing. (That’s if there is even any of them that actually think this.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. mavxp (490 comments) says:

    Dont be naive guys.. This is realpolitik pure and simple. The electorate are dumb and the media will fall for soundbites like this. Playing to nationalism and fears of the yellow peril. Old school tools for gaining power. Yes they have no shame.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 (856 comments) says:

    perhaps we can remember that NZ companies own several thousand hectares of farmland in China, oh, and the 10s of thousands of hectares in Chile, Brazil, the US and Australia

    we could mention that NZers make up 25% of all the dairy farmers in Australia

    but no, that would let facts interfere in an emotional debate.

    So lets go back to Mr Goff and what he believes in. Wasnt he the free trade dude? the Minister of, oh, trade?

    The one who went round the world calling for free and open flows of goods, services and capital?

    I am afraid DPF is right. I actually like Phil, but he has just demonstrated there is not a single principle that he will stand up for except power – and clearly he isnt serious about that either. After all, its not as if he isnt on the record with his previously “deeply held” beliefs.

    What a plonker! Next!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 (856 comments) says:

    Sadly Mavxp you are probably right, 3 generations of professional “educators” have ensured that New Zealanders have the attention of gnats and the reading age of 8 year olds (except of course for the 500,000 adults in NZ who are functionally illiterate).

    But they all have feelings, and feelings are all that matter in a world of handouts and gratification.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. MT_Tinman (2,791 comments) says:

    Kaya, I’ve read your link.

    It doesn’t say anything.

    Who owns the land in New Zealand doesn’t matter unless, as in Ireland at the times your link refers to, land owners automatically form the government and set the law controlling land use.

    As that great and wise politician, Adolf Hitler, pointed out, ownership means nothing as long as the government, through legislation, controls the use of that land.

    I agree with your summation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Whaleoil (766 comments) says:

    It sounds like Labour is desperately trying to shore up the greedy old people vote before Winston raises his head again.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. bc (1,251 comments) says:

    “I assume that a rugby field is around equal to a hectare.”

    Not even close. A rugby field is less than half a hectrae. Now given the dimensions of a rugby field is pretty easy information to find, I can only assume you deiberately want to exaggerate the amounts.

    [DPF: Umm not at all. Having them less than a hectare actually damages Labour more, and strengthens my argument. ]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. CrazyIvan (75 comments) says:

    Re Shania Twain, it also has to be noted that she and her husband bought a lease, not the freehold title.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. MT_Tinman (2,791 comments) says:

    There is an article listed on Stuff “Kids on ‘planes: is there a solution?”

    Obviously the government has answered this and provided the solution.

    The seats will all be taken up by those hectares keeping the kids at home.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. MikeNZ (3,234 comments) says:

    They have missed the boat, because they’re (all) not people of principle but wankers of compromise..

    Only NZ citizens can buy our land all other lease it, whether 99yr (or less) doesn’t matter.
    simple rules for simple solution.
    All existing owners have to sell to a NZ citizen going forward.

    Wanna own our land be one of us!

    (now to sort out what makes a good NZ citizen :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. john.bt (170 comments) says:

    We know that Goff and the Labour party are a bunch of hypocritical, incompetent fools but what about the idiot journalist who wrote this story. A two page article with a number of quotes from Labour on how they will limit land sales but not one mention of the fact that under Labour 650,000 hectares were sold to foreigners.

    To be a Dompost journo it appears you also have to toe the Labour party line. This guy Hartevelt is as bad as Tracey Watkins and Vernon Small.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    the deity formerly known as nigel6888 –

    New Zealand companies do not own land in China, they do not permit foreign ownership of land. As for the other countries, just because they do something stupid doesn’t mean we have to. It’s reassuring to know that Key and Bollard agree that it isn’t such a great idea.

    “New Zealand, the world’s largest dairy exporter, has seen rising Chinese interest in its products in recent years but some, including Prime Minister John Key, have voiced disquiet about farmland falling into foreign hands.

    Reserve Bank of New Zealand governor Alan Bollard said relations with China raised questions about who should own the country’s export industries and where the exports should be processed.

    “I’m talking about export of primary product and the extent to which it’s processed in New Zealand and owned in New Zealand — or not,” Bollard told AFP. ”

    http://www.lankabusinessonline.com/fullstory.php?nid=931407175

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. ben (2,386 comments) says:

    Fuck they are getting more desperate.

    Best line of the day.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    MT_Tinman – I agree with what you (and Herr Hilter) say about Government controlling what happens on the land. I just fail to see why you would sell a resource that is genuinely sustainable and will generate income forever. Leasing is the way to go.

    As for the Irish situation.

    “During the famine years there was plenty of food in Ireland enough to feed double its population. Yes the potato failed but all other crops thrived. Under the system at the time Irish food was exported mainly to English markets but from they’re found its way to many parts of the world. It puzzled many to hear there was famine in a land that had so much food to export .In normal countries it was usual to export food only after its population was fed. This was not the case in Ireland; during the period her food was taken away against the wishes of her people, usually at gunpoint and escorted to the ports under military guard. It was then carried away on ships leaving misery and starvation behind.”

    Are you saying the government would legislate that the new owners of the land would not be allowed to send their produce overseas? Can’t see that happening.

    I know the argument is it’s only a small proportion of the total land mass but it’s the start of a slippery slope.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. yesjg (42 comments) says:

    Surely the rule for foreigners buying land or property here should be: If a New Zealander can buy land or property in your country then you can do the same here in New Zealand.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    DPF – your calculations and figures are disingenuous, you haven’t been working with Goff’s GST pamphlet people have you? :)

    You are talking about the total land mass in NZ. Take away mountains, lakes, towns. cities. swamps, forests etc etc. Then how much of what is left is actually productive? That’s a whole different figure and a lot less than you make out. Let’s not resort to Labour’s tactics.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    yesjg – as I said earlier, just because someone else does something dumb is not a reason to do it yourself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. bhudson (4,720 comments) says:

    DPF / bc,

    (Ok, ok, I’ll play the pedant)

    DPF – you win on both counts – the smaller the size of the rugby field the worse the argument for Labour (because it would show that National was in fact allowing the sale of only a tiny bit of land.) However, the size of an international rugby filed is almost precisely 1ha

    http://metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/how-big-hectare/

    This is a double lose bc – one for not checking your facts, and one for not knowing what they [your own] actually mean

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. BlairM (2,266 comments) says:

    I’m sorry, but….

    What is wrong with selling land if you think you can invest the cash in a more profitable way elsewhere? (that is why people sell land)

    What is wrong with someone who is not a New Zealander buying it? Don’t you like darkies? Do they smell or something?!

    If you don’t own a piece of land, what difference does it make to you who owns it? Why is it better if the person who owns it can say “fush and chips” and “sweet as, bro”? Are they going to give you cheaper rents? Are they going to sell their produce to you at “mates rates”? I don’t think so.

    If you don’t want to sell your land to a darkie, then don’t. Nobody is making you. But don’t stop somebody else selling their land if that’s what they want to do.

    There is no compelling argument in favour of stopping New Zealanders from selling their own land to anyone they please. In fact, there is only two words for it:

    XENOPHOBIC BULLSHIT

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. BlairM (2,266 comments) says:

    BTW, if you really want to see foreigners taking over, start fucking with their property rights. Ask the late 19th Century Afrikaaners how that one worked out for them. Or the Mexicans in their formerly northermost province of “Tejas”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    BlairM – Take a chill pill. It’s nothing to do with xenophobia, it’s common sense. I didn’t notice anyone bringing “darkie” into the equation except you.

    As stated earlier, the “cash” you are talking about that’s awash in the world might as well be Disney dollars the way the US and Europe are creating it out of thin air. It’s eventually going to devalue making the beads and musket price in the early 1840′s look like a good deal. Why swap real tangible assets for fiat currency based on nothing that isn’t even worth the paper it isn’t printed on?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. BlairM (2,266 comments) says:

    kaya – most New Zealanders who sell farms don’t keep the money in foreign currency. They can convert into gold, or whatever, if they like. Or they buy land somewhere else, either in NZ or overseas. Or they buy shares. They don’t necessarily just hold on to the cash and keep it in the bank.

    Common sense? You make no sense at all. If you are not a xenophobe, what is your problem with foreign ownership of New Zealand land? Why does it matter whether the owner has a Kiwi accent or not? I think you need to take a deep look at your views and figure out why you believe as you do. Because it makes no rational or economic sense to prohibit land sales or regulate discriminatory practices in those transactions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. OctagonGrappler (84 comments) says:

    I cant understand liabour. They dont want Chinese to own Farms, But they want to bring in masses of Chinese Migrants that will eventually alter our course culturally and economically. Still in 30 years our ethnic dominated parliment will ease the laws regarding this.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. adze (1,695 comments) says:

    I don’t support foreign land sales for the simple reason that international demand combined with strong foreign currencies have a very real potential to inflate land prices – leading to pressure on domestic real estate and farmland markets. Unlike currency, increased productivity doesn’t result in more land. So it will always be a limited resource. There’s also a reciprocity argument for those countries that do not permit foreign land sales – why should we let our foreign investment be put at a competitive disadvantage?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,668 comments) says:

    I wonder if ANY of the dead shits bleating on here about leasehold title versus fee simple actually have a clue about the difference between the two. I’m sure they don’t. Most probably have never heard of fee simple.

    In my view it doesn’t matter what form of title is being suggested, I would not allow any farmland to be sold to or any processing capacity to be controlled by the greasy little pricks who allowed babies to die rather than have the image their nice games tarnished by a scandal.

    That’s the real issue folks. FTA or no FTA you don’t get into bed in your own country with a bunch of people who have absolutely no scruples whatever, about anything. Eventually they will destroy our dairy industry.

    Tell them to fuck off, I say. Politely and inscrutably, of course.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    “If you are not a xenophobe, what is your problem with foreign ownership of New Zealand land? ”

    Have a read of this, and then tell me why you think that having concerns about privately owned land all over the globe falling into the hands of a totalitarian communist government is an example of xenophobia.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. OctagonGrappler (84 comments) says:

    Adolph. What is also laughable is liabour party list member Raymond Huo said that Kiwis dont understand the friendliness and personal touch Chinese like when doing business. He says we must learn business chinese style ie becoming friends and building honesty and trust before they do business.

    I thought the Chinese had no principles in Business its all about corruption and bribes and backstabbing. The Chinese want Australian minerals and kiwi protein to service its own population. Hence why Kevin Rudd was so popular among the chinese and Goff and Key are going to hand over our nation to these parasites.

    Mark my words by 2020 we will be part of an EU Style Asia Union with open borders and free movement of Labour and the Chinese with there hard currency can move there Sheeple to our shores.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    BlairM – that’s the great thing about freedom of thought and speech and open debate. The ability to have different points of view. I think your point of view is idiotic, I am not a xenophobe and don’t even have a kiwi accent myself.
    We will just disagree. There is nothing I can say to you or you to me to change each others minds.

    I see you are a financial advisor and former ACT, explains a lot.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. reid (15,541 comments) says:

    “I thought the Chinese had no principles in Business its all about corruption and bribes and backstabbing.”

    Yes I think possibly OG the ancient Chinese culture is about a bit more than that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    Got to love the Chinese justice system though.

    Australian/Chinese executive jailed for 10 years for taking kickbacks:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/china-business/7533790/Rio-Tinto-executive-Stern-Hu-jailed-for-10-years-in-China.html

    Wonder how long Hotchins and Watson would have got. Faye and Richwhite would have been shot.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. OctagonGrappler (84 comments) says:

    reid. Ancient chinese culture has been inherited by those who left china prior to 1949. The current climate in china is very much built on the cultural revolution. The Chinese have no issue with bulldozing ancient Han symbols. They are incredibly ethno-centric and we need to be carefull before we open our borders to them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. reid (15,541 comments) says:

    “Faye and Richwhite would have been shot.”

    Well I would have shot them as well, kaya, but apparently, that’s not allowed anymore, thanks largely to people like you.

    Thanks very much.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. reid (15,541 comments) says:

    “reid. Ancient chinese culture has been inherited by those who left china prior to 1949.”

    But what about all those people who didn’t leave China prior to 1949, OG?

    “The current climate in china is very much built on the cultural revolution.”

    No it’s not and it hasn’t been since Deng Xiaoping set it on its current path. Haven’t you noticed?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. BlairM (2,266 comments) says:

    Good grief, I ask for some real arguments against letting people sell their own land freely, and I get ad hominem nonsense.

    If you can’t give a proper account of your beliefs, then you are a bigot.

    You may not like commies and fascists. Neither do I. But if someone else wants to sell their land to them, that’s their business. I’m really not sure why having the Chinese Government owning farms in New Zealand is a problem. Give me a worst case scenario that doesn’t sound like some paranoid fantasy, and maybe you might start to sound convincing. Otherwise, those who want to control the property rights of others are just bigots and xenophobes, and should admit it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Mark (1,301 comments) says:

    Rural land should be off the table for all but NZ resident owners. Farming is the life blood of this country. To allow large scale foreign ownership of our farms puts this under threat. There is no current mechanism to address the potential for the export for farm products from NZ with no residual benefit to the NZ economy. For example unedr current legislation what is to stop a foreign corporation growning product in NZ and exporting that product to their own distribution network without tarrif or any form of tax in NZ. In effect NZ would simply be the bottom rung in a vertically integrated supply chain that generates its taxable income outside NZ.

    Why then would that corporation buy from NZ farmers when they can produce product on their own account. Seems like we are hell bent of shooting ourselves in the feet here.

    If foreign companies want to be primary producers in NEw Zealand to cater to their own supply chain then we will need to think very hard abount outr tax system.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. BlairM (2,266 comments) says:

    Rural land should be off the table for all but NZ resident owners. Farming is the life blood of this country. To allow large scale foreign ownership of our farms puts this under threat.

    Ummm… how? If farming really is the lifeblood of this country people will want to hold onto their farms, won’t they? And if they are not making enough money, they will sell them, and reinvest in something that does. How is that bad? For anybody?!

    There is no current mechanism to address the potential for the export for farm products from NZ with no residual benefit to the NZ economy.

    Nonsense. If you sell a farm for a million dollars, you are a million dollars richer. That’s a benefit to the NZ economy. Why should you benefit from the efforts and investments of others? Get off your lazy arse and do something for yourself!

    For example unedr current legislation what is to stop a foreign corporation growning product in NZ and exporting that product to their own distribution network without tarrif or any form of tax in NZ.

    What’s wrong with that?!

    In effect NZ would simply be the bottom rung in a vertically integrated supply chain that generates its taxable income outside NZ.

    So what?!

    Why then would that corporation buy from NZ farmers when they can produce product on their own account. Seems like we are hell bent of shooting ourselves in the feet here.

    Why do you assume that foreigners are more efficient at producing farm goods than New Zealanders? Farms produce a lot of different goods. For that to be true, foreign corporations would have to be better at EVERYTHING, which, while theoretically possible, is in reality almost impossible. Farms also consume a lot of goods themselves. Are you saying they are going to helicopter everything in?!!!!

    If foreign companies want to be primary producers in NEw Zealand to cater to their own supply chain then we will need to think very hard abount outr tax system.

    How about everybody paying less tax? Or do you want to discriminate racially with your tax system?

    Still xenophobic, bigoted bullshit, which makes no economic sense. Let people sell to whomever they like, as is their natural human right.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.