Herald on Labour’s home loan policy

September 26th, 2013 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

The Herald editorial:

’s new leader appears to think he can manage New Zealand’s financial system better than the . If he was in power now, he says, he would not allow the bank to include first-home buyers in its mortgage lending restriction to take effect from next week.

The bank is about to limit the amount of lending that retail banks can do on deposits of less than 20 per cent of the price of the house. It is acting out of concern that banks are becoming too exposed to the risk that another house price bubble will burst, causing prices to fall. If that were to happen, the consequences for banks might be costly but for low-equity first-home owners it could be catastrophic.

The little equity they have amassed could be wiped out, leaving them owing the bank more than their house is worth.

If that sounds bad enough, other policies espoused by David Cunliffe would make their position even worse. If elected, he says, Labour would exempt first-home buyers from the new lending limits until its capital gains tax took hold and its low-cost house building programme took effect.

Nothing would be more likely to bring about a fall in house prices than a capital gains tax and an increase in state housing. If Mr Cunliffe had the interest of first-home owners at heart he would not only limit their access to low equity loans, he would do so well in advance of his other proposals.

So Labour is joining the Greens in promoting policies to leave home owners with negative equity!

When it announced the proposed restriction the Prime Minister made it known the Government wanted an exemption for first-home seekers. The bank was unmoved, pointing out that first-home buyers were about 30 per cent of low-deposit borrowers and they had to be included if the measure was to be effective.

John Key gave way, deferring to the bank’s expertise in its statutory jurisdiction. The bank’s so-called independence in these matters has been in the bedrock of New Zealand’s economy for nearly 30 years. In that time its independence has been respected by both major parties in government and when they were in opposition.

Labour’s finance spokesman, David Parker, believes the party could exempt first-home seekers without removing the Reserve Bank’s independence; his new leader appears not to care whether the bank’s role is compromised or not.

The independence of the Reserve Bank has been a critical element of our economy. We should be very worried about promises to over-ride its decisions by politicians.

Mr Cunliffe needs to be very careful in this area. As the leader of one of the main parties, his utterances could be damaging to long-term confidence in the economy well before he threatens to be in any position to act.

It is hard to believe he would carry out the promise to over-ride the Reserve Bank’s independence to exempt first-home seekers, if only because of the obvious risk to their equity. He was looking to score an easy political point.

Anything that makes it harder for first-home seekers to get finance is bound to be superficially unpopular, as proven by a poll at the weekend. Political leaders who withstand this pressure and respect the Reserve Bank’s independence deserve more credit for it than Mr Key has received.

Governments are all-powerful in this country, it would be easy to weaken the bank’s legislated jurisdiction and do untold damage to our economy.

Mr Cunliffe’s stance is a worry.

Basically Labour are campaigning on cheap and easy credit – the very thing that caused the global financial crisis. We should be very wary.

Tags: , , , ,

46 Responses to “Herald on Labour’s home loan policy”

  1. Dennis Horne (2,305 comments) says:

    That horse has bolted anyway but maybe Cunlife is a cowboy.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Ross12 (1,367 comments) says:

    This coming from the NZ Herald is interesting.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. gump (1,608 comments) says:

    There’s nothing wrong with negative equity. It’s a normal outcome from normally functioning markets.

    Just ask the Mighty River Power shareholders.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Nothing would be more likely to bring about a fall in house prices than a capital gains tax and an increase in state housing

    But David Farrar has consistently said house prices in Auckland are too high…have you changed your position?

    The Herald is oblivious to the fact that first home buyers will still be able to buy a house after October 1 with 10% deposit. The editorial writer clearly thought they’d like to take a cheap shot at Cunliffe a la Matthew Hooton instead of stating the facts. And in breaking news, Radio New Zealand has been forced to apologise for Hooton’s scurrilous remarks about Cunliffe earlier this week. David Farrar is expected to issue a similar apology.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 24 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,871 comments) says:

    Hmmmmmm.

    Cunliffe has more Muldoon in his little finger that John Key has in his whole body.

    Remind me please, who were the idiots who were calling John Key ‘Muldoon’?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. bhudson (4,736 comments) says:

    David Cunliffe’s last piece of economic management via govt regulation wiped $3bn off the value of Telecom. It’s not surprising that he might think that wiping $ billions of equity from home owners is a good idea.

    He knows how to ‘get the job done.’

    Perhaps he should be known as “Wreck-it Ralph”

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (866 comments) says:

    “Mr Cunliffe’s stance is a worry” – Mate it is not. Check the NZ Herald opinion poll. He is a winner alright.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 21 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. gazzmaniac (2,319 comments) says:

    There’s nothing wrong with negative equity. It’s a normal outcome from normally functioning markets.

    Just ask the Mighty River Power shareholders.

    They would only have negative equity if they borrowed money to buy the shares. Given that margin loans are usually restricted to 50-60% of market value of shares, there is no way that they would have negative equity.

    Personally I think it should be up to the individual banks to decide what LVRs are acceptable and who are high risk borrowers, not the Reserve Bank. Those same banks should also assured that they will never receive a government bailout.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. gazzmaniac (2,319 comments) says:

    Nothing would be more likely to bring about a fall in house prices than a capital gains tax and an increase in state housing

    A capital gains tax won’t bring about a fall in house prices, as evidenced by higher house prices in Australia. A CGT on housing is a tax on inflation, no more and no less. Landlords tend to hold onto properties for longer where there is a CGT, which actually drives up prices due to decreased supply.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. burt (8,174 comments) says:

    Silent ‘t’ is just getting started – he’ll be promising a free house to all beneficiaries and a pony to all all kids to young to vote before we can say “Offering voters other peoples money is popular”.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. alwyn (409 comments) says:

    @gazzmaniac.
    A Caoital Gains Tax won’t necesarily lead to an increase in house prices provided you don’t exempt the family owned home from the scheme.
    The major reason there is a vast increase in house prices in Australia is because they exempt the family home from their CGT and also from the Assets test for getting their equivalent of our national super.
    Our totally brilliant, graduate of Harvard no less, leader of the Labour Party would never be so stupid to exclude the family home from his CGT would he?
    Oh, that’s exactly what he is planning.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Fisiani (1,021 comments) says:

    Cunliffe believes that people will vote for free money. Cunliffe believes that voters are too thick to realise the price of free money. Cunliffe believes that you only have to fool enough people in November 2014. Cunliffe believes that enough people will believe him.
    The task ahead is to make the voters realise that Cunliffe is truly deluded.
    The best way to do this is to make the word Cunliffe into a joke.
    ‘Cunliffe’ has to mean ridiculous, dangerous and unbelievable.
    Humour is the best weapon to address his pomposity.

    I wanted to walk on water but then I realised I wasn’t Cunliffe.
    I can multiply the loaves and fishes and KFC family packs because I am the Cunliffe.
    I can give everyone free houses and a high paid job because I am the Cunliffe
    I can Cunliffe you into believing that I can make you all rich.
    I can fool all the people because I am the Cunliffe.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. edd (157 comments) says:

    The government needs to assist more people into their own homes so that we have more responsible citizens paying rates. It’s not rocket science…. It’s call economic growth….

    John Key has a reputation for being poll driven. Well the latest poll is being driven right into his guts….. Anyone for lasts nights dinner? Ha Ha….

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 25 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Fisiani (1,021 comments) says:

    Note my use of The Cunliffe. subtle but highly effective.
    He cannot use this technique against National for then he would be referring to Jon Key as The Key

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. gazzmaniac (2,319 comments) says:

    We noticed it and chose to ignore it.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. LiberalismIsASin (288 comments) says:

    It doesn’t matter if its possible or whatever. All that matters is that it gets them votes, and such pronouncements probably will.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Mark (1,467 comments) says:

    I am not sure that either National or Labour politicians get basic economics yet. Tinkering with the demand side of the Auckland Housing Market in this way is not going to make a hell of a lot of difference in the longer term unless appropriate measures are taken to address the supply side that is being generated by population growth. How fucking hard is that concept to grasp. The reserve bank governor is using what limited tools he has to deal with demand but the supply issue is in the hands of Government. They have talked about addressing the RMA for 5 years now and achieved very little. DFP has banged on about land supply constraint and hes right but nothing is being done.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Camryn (552 comments) says:

    Basically Labour are campaigning on cheap and easy credit – the very thing that caused the global financial crisis.

    Exactly. Politicians and voters have all too gladly pushed the meme that bankers caused the GFC rather than face up to the fact that voters wanted cheap credit and politicians made sure we got it (starting with Clinton in the US and continued by Bush). Banks happily profited from it all and did a less than stellar job of dealing with all the risk flowing in, but they didn’t create the situation.

    I’d hate to see Cunliffe leading NZ into being the first country to repeat the mistake!

    On the subject of repeating mistakes… I’d also hate to see New Zealand to continue our destructive cycle of only turning to a right-leaning government to bail us out of trouble and immediately flooding left again as soon as the economy starts to hum along. How about keeping our foot on the accelerator a little longer this time before we vote Labour back in to fritter it all away on inefficiencies and comforts? Put more bluntly… can we please get a few more years to create some wealth before letting Labour get their claws into it? We’re like a yacht that tacks too often (topical metaphor alert!)

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Lance (2,614 comments) says:

    @Camryn
    It’s always other peoples fault, personal responsibility is dead.. get with the program

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Basically Labour are campaigning on cheap and easy credit – the very thing that caused the global financial crisis.

    Actually. the main causes were greed and a lack of proper regulation. The Right continue to think both are great.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 18 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    I’d also hate to see New Zealand to continue our destructive cycle of only turning to a right-leaning government to bail us out of trouble

    You should be a comedian. This government has doubled NZ’s debt. Under Labour it was at an all-time low. Then there were all those budget surpluses under Labour.

    But fret not – there’s medication you can take for your alzheimers.

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/government-debt-to-gdp

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 21 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. dime (9,788 comments) says:

    Fisiani – agree! i mentioned in the GD that there should be fake CV’s floating around that take the piss out of this narcissist

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. greenjacket (449 comments) says:

    Mark: “Tinkering with the demand side of the Auckland Housing Market in this way is not going to make a hell of a lot of difference in the longer term unless appropriate measures are taken to address the supply side that is being generated by population growth. How fucking hard is that concept to grasp.”

    Absolutely Mark. Price is a function of supply and demand. If prices are perceived to be too high, then the best solution is to increase supply. And the way to do that is to open up land in south and north Auckland to urban development. The Nats have been absurdly slow and cautious in their reform of the RMA.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Yoza (1,763 comments) says:

    It is a little difficult to subscribe to the fantasy that The Reserve Bank is an independent entity when one of its recent governors left to become leader of the National Party, then when that failed joined and led the more extreme right ACT Party.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. gazzmaniac (2,319 comments) says:

    They have talked about addressing the RMA for 5 years now and achieved very little. DFP has banged on about land supply constraint and hes right but nothing is being done

    It doesn’t help when your coalition partners turn their backs on common sense around the RMA. Every party except for National and Act now must shoulder some of the blame for high land prices.

    Actually. the main causes were greed and a lack of proper regulation. The Right continue to think both are great

    Perhaps it was over-regulation that caused it, given that the US government forced banks to lend to people that they wouldn’t have in a truly free market.

    You should be a comedian. This government has doubled NZ’s debt. Under Labour it was at an all-time low. Then there were all those budget surpluses under Labour.

    You mean the years of growth set up by prudent management by the Bolger/Shipley governments? Labour left office with a structural deficit projected to continue for a decade. They increased the size of the public sector by 50% relative to GDP. National chose not to slash and burn but to reform slowly and continually in order to not hurt affected people too much.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Camryn (552 comments) says:

    Exactly, gazzmaniac.

    ross69 – You actually reinforce my point. We elect Labour when the fundamentals are good and they set about squandering them and only vote National in when the economy sours and we need to tighten our belts. Labour may look like they’re doing a great job avoiding deficits because the damage they do is not immediately tangible – the lost opportunity to grow in good times. Perhaps another analogy… we tend to work hard in the winter (i.e. National government in bad times) and relax all summer (i.e. Labour government in good times). I’d like NZ to actually take advantage of a summer for once, then we wouldn’t need to scrape through the winters.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Harriet (4,741 comments) says:

    WTF?

    One minute there is a housing shortage, and the very next minute the reserve bank is worried that housing prices will collapse – and in the forseeable future – and enough to put the banks at ‘risk’?

    Hardly!

    Some of the better economists actually work at the banks and not the reserve – and the reason being – they get paid more so as to handle the banks ‘risk’.

    Banking boards are not quite as negligent with regards to controling their risk as the reserve is indicating at the present time.

    The reserve is not only reading this wrong in my opinion but taking the wrong action.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Cunningham (836 comments) says:

    Ross69 you truly are a fuckwit. Do you seriously think that the surplus was due to good management of the economy? Look at the facts. Debt sky rocketed under Labour (including house prices). The top tax bracket stayed where it was resulting in more and more people being robbed by the government. They put in hugely expensive policies (as well as being bent over and buying Kiwirail for double its actual value), ones that have caused big headaches once the recession hit. The public sector was bloated massively. The export sector was in recession from 2005 onwards. Does this actually sound like they did a good job? It was a big house of cards that came crashing down. Get your head out of your arse FFS. I don’t know why I even bother because your brain in so hardwired to hating National that you ignore the facts.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. scrubone (3,090 comments) says:

    You should be a comedian. This government has doubled NZ’s debt. Under Labour it was at an all-time low. Then there were all those budget surpluses under Labour.

    It’s amazing how many on the left buy into this “the economy was fine under Labour, National caused the problem” nonsense.

    Do they seriously think that the average Joe on the street is going to blame National for a situation that started under Labour?

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. All_on_Red (1,546 comments) says:

    “Nothing would be more likely to bring about a fall in house prices than a capital gains tax ”

    And here is the list of countries around the world where this has actually happened:
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    There you go- all done.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. All_on_Red (1,546 comments) says:

    “But fret not – there’s medication you can take for your alzheimers”
    Too true but unfortunately for you there is no cure for being a moron.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. In Vino Veritas (138 comments) says:

    Laughable really, when you consider that it was Clinton’s desperate desire to get people with limited funds into housing, that lead to his fiddling with the Glass-Steagall Act. And the the requirement that Government supervised lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lend more to those riskier borrowers. And look what happened to them. And Cunliffe wants to get banks not owned by the Government to keep pushing low equity, low interest rate loans to people who are risky borrowers. Sheesh, the socialists never learn. Though I’m sure when the poo hits the fan that Cunliffe and his mates will run for cover and blame John Key. Groundhog day….. again.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,871 comments) says:

    “Actually. the main causes were greed and a lack of proper regulation. “

    Absolutely true.

    The greed of the sociaalist left in the US for the votes of indigent fools who could not service a lawnmower, let alone a loan; and the striking down by the same socialist left of the very regulations which hitherto had prevented said fools from being given loans.

    Bad luck, Ross69. Go to the bottom of the class.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. hj (6,794 comments) says:

    80% of our population growth in the last couple of decades has been the net inflow of non NZ citizens .
    “Among policy and analytical circles in New Zealand there is a pretty high degree of enthusiasm for high levels of immigration. Some of that stems from the insights of literature on increasing returns to scale. Whatever the general global story, the actual productivity track record here in the wake of very strong inward migration is poor. In an Australian context, the Productivity Commission – hardly a hot-bed of xenophobia or populism – concluded that any benefits from migration to Australia were captured by migrants and there were few or no discernible economic benefits to Australians. And that was in a country already rich and successful and with materially higher national saving and domestic investment rates than those in NZ.”
    http://www.treasury.govt.nz/downloads/pdfs/mi-jarrett-comm.pdf
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/4622459/Government-policies-blamed-for-house-prices

    Unfortuanetely Labour has too many of these people:

    “Both in New Zealand and globally, the best of the leftwing tradition has always rejected small-minded nationalism, xenophobia and racism. In fact, leftists of an internationalist tradition have always favoured globalization and getting rid of national borders and barriers to migration. Progressive advocates of globalization of course do not defend a handful of rich imperialist countries, including New Zealand, dominating the world’s economy, but instead advocate an integrated and radically egalitarian world economy where production is based on social need and not on private profit. ”

    http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2012/02/guest-blog-post-john-moore-leftwing-xenophobia-in-new-zealand.html

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,871 comments) says:

    Camryn@12:56

    Tony Abbott has summed this up well. In the NZ context it reads:-

    National is about getting things done.

    Labour is about seeming to get things done.

    Australians have sent a strong message of disapproval to the seemers.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. wreck1080 (3,853 comments) says:

    John Key rides over treasure advice all the time. Why not the reserve bank too?

    Good for the goose….

    although, i’d prefer them not to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Do they seriously think that the average Joe on the street is going to blame National for a situation that started under Labour?

    Do you seriously think that the average Joe on the street is going to accept excuses that everything can be blamed on the previous government…six years after this lot have been in office? Oh and this lot have doubled NZ’s debt…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. ross69 (3,652 comments) says:

    Cunningham,

    I suggest you have a lie down before you have a heart attack.

    But first, look at the stats. Under Labour, NZ’s indebtedness was at an all-time low. Under your beloved National, it has doubled. I doubt the PM is concerned by this as it will soon be Labour’s problem.

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/government-debt-to-gdp

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Camryn (552 comments) says:

    ross69 – You’re still crediting Labour for being in government during such good times that they could hardly spend the money fast enough, while blaming National for being cautious in addressing the structural deficit Labour left them with as the economy tanked.

    Yes, it has been six years… but do you think National should’ve been more aggressive in reducing the government spending levels they inherited over those six years? Many of us here would’ve loved them to, but I seriously doubt you’re one. So, it’s more than a bit rich to blame them for the consequences of that (i.e. borrowing).

    What I don’t understand is why you’re pushing your blinkered version of events here on Kiwiblog. I’d understand it as general political PR to sway people with less inclination to ponder the issues, but the fact that you push it here – where people come explicitly to debate political issues – indicates you actually believe what you’re saying!

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. bhudson (4,736 comments) says:

    He cannot use this technique against National for then he would be referring to Jon Key as The Key

    Don’t count on his advisers being that clever. In the 2011 election, National supporters wore blue shirts emblazoned with “I am a Key Person”

    Young Labour, being as clever as only they possibly could be, took to wearing red shirts saying “I am not a Key person”

    Such incredible insight.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. lastmanstanding (1,263 comments) says:

    Kunliffe Parker Robertson et al are financial pygmies. They have less understanding of how an economy actually works than first year Economics 101 students.

    Same goes for the Ocker Norman. Their policies would ensure not only first home buyers went underwater but also a large number of Lab/Greens voters.

    Talk about shooting your potential voters in the head.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Warren Murray (298 comments) says:

    When i watched Campbell’s piece on the Ashburton family that got caught with a worthless ASB pre approval, two things struck me;

    They were not first home buyers, they were trading up, so the Labour exemption wouldn’t apply.
    They seemed to be very happy to be stung with a 1% or $3400 low equity fee.

    Fools and their money are soon parted.

    If they stayed in their bungalow a bit longer that lost money would have been their equity in their next house.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. gazzmaniac (2,319 comments) says:

    I thought that ASB gave their customers until 4 October to find a house before their pre-approvals expire? If so, given that it’s still September they should get their arses into gear and find a property to buy rather than whynge to John Campbell.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. burt (8,174 comments) says:

    When Labour are elected will it still be legal to buy a house with your own money or will legislation be passed such that only unemployed people are allowed to own property using money given to them from the rental properties confiscated from filthy rich pricks ?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Anthony (789 comments) says:

    Ross69 and others seem to conveniently forget that the country’s total debt – private sector included for all those home loans – increased hugely under Labour to reach an all time high! While Labour paid down some government debt they were too gutless to do anything about accelerating private sector debt. No capital gains tax, no land tax, a higher top income tax rate to encourage borrowing to buy real estate! A higher company tax rate to discourage productive investment.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Meatloaf (171 comments) says:

    The negative equity debate is just a scare. The reality is you need 20% of your own money for the bank to lend you the other 80% of the house. So, house values can go down by 19.9%, and you will still have equity. However, try to take this 20%, and reduce it is madness. Germany has twice as much machinery, tools, and equipment as we do, and they have a higher standard of living. Australia has 1.5 times as much, and everyone is going their for a higher standard of living.

    At the moment if you want a loan for machinery or money to start up a factory, the bank will ask you to mortgage your property, and with this money you can borrow for machinery. So its easy credit for housing, hard credit for factories. And the reason we have all these problems, is cause the focus has been on housing, and not on creating things.

    So, Labour is going to make the problems even worse. But the whole negative equity is bs.

    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.