Morning reader,
Kris Sayce is busy finishing up Australian Wealth Gameplan today. So, I thought I’d share a few words with you this morning.
Yes, he did make me assemble my own chair. And, surprisingly it hasn’t fallen apart – yet.
Kris will be back tomorrow, but in the meantime, grab a coffee and enjoy…
“The signs of recovery being seen around the world are due to huge stimulus packages, which will only prop up economies for another 12 to 18 months before they collapse again.”
Those aren’t my words. They’re the words of John R. Talbott.
Who’s he? Well, he was recently in Australia for the Brisbane Writers’ Festival
Call me uncultured if you like, but the Brisbane Writers’ Festival doesn’t sound like the type of event for a doomsday economist to pitch their tent. Especially not a former Wall Street investment banker.
But this is one banker, turned writer worth listening to.
His claim to fame is that he predicted the dot.com and US housing markets crash. However, his comments have generated almost no attention in Australia.
Why? Probably because he doesn’t share the “smile-and-pretend-the-Australian-economy-is-going-to-bounce-back-quicker-than-a-Hollywood-starlet’s-waistline-after-pregnancy” point of view.
But Talbott’s alarm about the next crash is valid. Yet it’s been ignored by the mainstream media and politicians. Probably because it’s depressing at best and at worst, it points to our economy falling in a saggy little heap.
So, why does Talbott have this bearish view? Simply because he believes China may have cooked the books.
That their economic recovery isn’t real.
If that’s true, it’s a frightening thought. Think about how much Australia relies on China. It’s one of the major supports to our export industries, especially the resources sector.
Yet the mainstream media continues to report that business and consumer spending will return as our commodities remain in hot demand. But what if it doesn’t? China will only demand our resources if other countries demand its manufactured goods.
Or if the Chinese begin consuming more of their own products.
The problem for China is that much of its exports are being propped up by stimulus handouts. It’s doubtful whether this can continue when the stimulus spending stops. And nor should it.
Unless, of course the banks go back to their bad old lending ways again. But that’s a different story.
Either way it results in more debt. One of the reasons we’re in this mess.
That’s why Talbott has been outspoken about using stimulus packages to save economies from recession. He’s pointed out that “Any positive number’s coming out of Australia, the US and China are the direct result of huge government spending”.
In other words, once the stimulus slows down, we’ll be faced with another sharp down turn.
And that means our commodity-driven recovery will be short lived. He considers this a ‘W-shaped’ recovery. And the next down-leg is waiting to happen.
Of course, if you believe what you read from the mainstream commentators it isn’t China that’s kept the economy going it’s been consumer spending…
Spending which has only been made possible by government handouts.
But what happens when government spending dries up?
Look, there are many factors to consider long term. Huge debt levels and retirement of the baby boomers will reduce individual spending and saving ability in the near future.
Crippling levels of national and personal debt and millions of retirees with inadequate savings means an increased cost to taxpayers.
It makes no sense to try and keep the Australian economy growing at its previous rate. Not when the growth is fuelled by borrowing from the future. History shows it hasn’t worked in the past and it won’t work now.
It’s always a short term solution. It’s like using sand bags to protect against a tsunami. It isn’t going to work despite the initial appearance of success.
So while governments, corporations and the media are flouting the return of the boom, it’s worth showing a lot of skepticism.
If Talbott is right, the second part of the W is coming and we’ll notice it more this time.
Other Stuff on the Markets
The S&P/ASX200 was yesterday to $4,831.10, while overnight on Wall Street the Dow Jones Industrial Average soared 1.47% to $10,015.86. In Europe the FTSE100 gained 1.98% and the CAC40 added 2.14%.
The price of gold in Australian dollars is trading at $1,161.08, while in US Dollars it is trading at $1,062.85. And the price of silver in Aussie dollars is $19.56 and in US Dollars it is $17.91.
The Aussie dollar gained versus the US dollar and Japanese Yen, trading at USD$0.9153 and JPY81.81
Crude oil closed overnight at USD$75.18
For the biggest movers on the market yesterday click here…
Shae Smith
Assistant Editor, Money Morning Australia
{ 46 comments… read them below or add one }
Well if he predicted the crash, how come he and others on this site didn’t see the recovery coming? Being half right doesn’t earn you a star in grade school these days.
http://www.sevenstories.com/book/?GCOI=58322100075200&fa=author&person_id=326
http://www.informit.com/store/product.aspx?isbn=0132044994
well he looks honest
So cash is king? no wonder no one says that anymore as it is apparent that govt wants you to continue spending and borrowing to spend more. It goes to show that the truth is this economic recovery is just an illusion.
lol, PF, don’t they have half a star for being half right. Hungarians have a saying that, translated, goes something like this:
Even a blind hen will find a grain every now and then.
Just don’t expect it to grow fat.
Hi – Who is to say he didn’t? I guess it does not take an expert analyst to predict that governments throwing huge amounts of (borrowed) money around would produce a temporary boost to the economies. but who can predict how much and when governments would do just that.
As always government actions are the greatest uncertainty and risk in any form of financial planning.
Good, solid article Shae. You write very similar to Kris, but with a touch of femininity.
PF – What do you mean “Well if he predicted the crash, how come he and others on this site didn’t see the recovery coming?”
…you are joking right?
Surely the obvious come back to this comment is that THERE IS NO RECOVERY…its a mirage, fuelled by Government stimulus. That was the point of the whole article. Thats been the point of everything written in MM and DR for the past year!
It goes without saying that Governments throwing billion and billions of dollars will give their economies a temporary sugar hit, but thats not a ‘recovery’ and so we havent ‘missed’ prediciting anything
cb – Hi, yes I like that saying. I heard something similar from an American recently when he said that even a blind squirrel will pick up an acorn occasionally.
I’m growing tired of people being trotted out as being somehow superior because they “saw” the crash coming. Well from me they get a big tick if they told their clients to sell shares before the crash, but invariably the ones that I have heard from also told their clients to sell houses when in fact late last year was the perfect time to buy and the worst time to sell, so they get a BIG “X” on that score.
If you then follow up their record in 2009 you will find that they didn’t advise their clients to buy shares in March, April, or even in May when big gains were to be had, so they get a BIG “X” for that as well.
Really one out of three ain’t that good, so I’m unimpressed by those who claim to have seen it coming, and haven’t been right since. Shadow has a better record than that lot and he gave his views freely to all who would listen. He predicted the stock market crash and the strength of the Aussie housing market. Unfortunately many people didn’t listen to him, and they based their investment strategy on very poor advice from the bear camp. Anyone who sold homes or didn’t buy a home because they thought house prices would crash further have cost themselves about 10% due to poor market timing.
I can’t complain, I didn’t sell property and I have been actively buying shares in this market. But listening to the bears really has cost so many people so much. I believe there will be a correction in 2010, but you would be a fool to miss out on this run in the meantime.
PuntPal – One day you will have to leave the bears behind. They can only be correct temporarily, not over the long term.
Not being able to predict irrational exuberance is not a failing in my opinion.
Fair enough those that picked this rally may feel like they got the last laugh, but its not over to the fat lady sings. By the end of 2010, we can do all the gloating we want because the picture will be a lot clearer then
I wont stop being a bear for long time yet mate – not until the global economy is off life support and private consumption and investment is driving growth..
Not going to happen, PuntPal, I don’t think. The overburden of debt will remain on the back of the real economy, forever hanging around, threatening imminent collapse. Occasionally it will collapse, but mostly it will just keep sucking up the juices to the baking and political oligarchy. In short, there will always be ample reason for being fearful and bearish for those so disposed.
PF – Who is Shadow? Do you have a link?
Yes, market timing is very difficult and it has cost me every time I tried it, so I don’t trust myself with it any longer. In the end, I came to the painful conclusion that I better be finished with it before it finishes me off.
7 extra interest rates a forecasted in near future ,to be implemented by gLEN sTEVENS,,,,,,,,,,
WHY???????????????????
because to make a dent ,any headway on this huge astronomical debt ,well much more payments have to occur
etch – yeah, right, since we cannot pay down the principal, at least we should pay some extra interest ……… Some bankster plan that is.
cb – Shadow is a well known poster on many sites. He used to post on ghpc so you may catch him there, or perhaps at Somersoft.
Also occasionally on Chris Joyes blog at business spectator. He isn’t as active these days as the eventual outcome is pretty well known now.
PuntPal – checkout Sean Reynolds post at – http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/The-Wood-on-housing-pd20091015-WTRFK?OpenDocument&src=is#EFE9A9EA84735B17CA2576500020CC61
PutPal, you make some good points, but I am not so sure your conclusion follows. Meddling by politicians and their mates on the gravy train, and the effect they therefore intend to have, and do have on the market, must surely be part of the prognostication game.
Not seeing something coming from the meddlers, especially when they are widely known about, cannot be an excuse for failing to see “that one.”
Let me illustrate: Steven Keen is a very smart man, and I by and large share his views on the economy and debt. Perhaps the singlemost significant reason why he called the property market wrong has been that he did not take full account of the meddlers, and people’s subsequent reactions to their meddling. He focused on the fundamentals and on that basis he pretty much made the right call. The problem, though, is that without taking into account the political and financial game, the fundamentals by themselves mostly lead you somewhere else.
Contrast this with, say, Marc Faber, who constantly refers in his justifications to the likely decisions of central bankers and politicians going forward. He bases his calls on these factors just as much, if not more, as he does on fundamentals. This, I suspect, is why he is heads and shoulders above the crowd. For the record, not only did he call the collapse, but also this recovery, and he pinned it to the day. If you consider his consistent performance, and the likely reason for that performance, it is hard to excuse the rest of the crowd, as you rather generously are trying to do.
Business Spectator is not loading for me PF, its been like this all week.
If you could cut and past the post it would be great…
That is a very powerful, and instructive, post by Sean Reynolds, PF.
But let me make a little observation for the record:
the rich landlord he is talking about, is probably no more than a run of the mill battler, who is most likely subsidising the rent to make repayments on the mortgage, so that Sean can have a roof over his head. It is a perspective all too easily lost sight of by those who have never had the experience of having a mortgaged property let out.
Here it is, PuntPal:
Sean Reynolds
Posted 15 Oct 2009 4:58 PM
You wonder why this news is met with hostility? It ruins dreams for renters like me? You know why people like me have to rent, what kind of situation drives us, we can’t afford to buy a house! Houses are too expensive for me and my friends. Why should we have to rent forever? And as BIS Shrapnel correctly say, houses are booming again and there’s no end in sight. Sydney prices are up 15% this year from what I’ve seen. It’s just not fair, is it? This news about the new boom is making our dreams even more unobtainable. I’m resigned to being a renter for life. I’ll always be ‘just renting’. If I had bought a house a few years ago I might have got onto the ladder but now I’m priced out forever. It is all the governments fault, and the population boom and housing shortage doesn’t help. I just wish people would stop wanting houses so much, so there wasn’t so much competition and I could finally get out of the rent trap, paying dead money to a rich landlord every week. In all honesty my biggest mistake was listening to doom&gloomers on depressing internet forums. They have been exposed as charlatans. The property bulls were right. I’m so angry! Sean.
cb – thanks for posting Sean’s rant (I will get to that shortly)
Firstly, I take your point on Prof Keen (by the way, Keen is one fo the few professors that has earnt the title). It’s no use to say I was right *but for the fact I didn’t predict the Government’s idiotic policies.
It’s like saying I was right about the result of a football game *but the weather was not forecast and the rain ruined my team’s chances.
A forecast must consider every variable and the Government is (now more than ever) clearly a variable!
But as a counter, a few points I would make:
1) Predicting the meddlers and their actions is very difficult and therefore, people like Prof Keen would prefer to just predict the core economics of a matter and provider a qualifier that this is of course ‘subject to any Government policies that might alter the fundamentals of the market’. Such an approach would obviously render the prediction less useful and easier to ignore, so people just predict and hope the Government doesn’t do anything too crazy. Which is a mistake when you put your credibility on the line and people like Joye and R Robertson rub salt in the wound with their petty comments and jibes.
2) Related to 1), before 2008, it wasn’t clear how much Government meddling would really occur. It might seem obvious now, but I reckon people are not being honest if they claim this kind of Government intervention (and the extent of it) was to be expected.
But the discussion between PF and myself related to people’s predictive credibility. PF seem to imply that someone (John Talbot) should not be able to gloat about the fact they saw the GFC coming, if they didn’t also see the 6 month rally that has been occurring. I would argue that these two things are totally different.
Seeing the GFC coming required people to have a contrarian view on economic theory and this view was found to be overwhelmingly correct. This means a very big tick for these guys!!
Predicting what has occurred since September 15 2008 has depended on predicting Governmental policy. Therefore if you saw the bull market coming, you can claim to be a savvy political-economy analyst, but the pure economic gloating remains with the right of the bears I believe….this is even more so the case because this matter is anything but resolved. So even gloating about the bull market is premature, because if you buy and hold and lose your gains when there is a correction (which there will be) then you haven’t really ‘won’ anyway.
However – I conceed that you and PF are generally right that Government meddling was always a (maybe ‘THE’) key consideration for making investment decision over the past 12 months.
Now onto Sean, who seems to wholly support PF’s view that the doomsayers have missed out due to their pessimism. Once again a few points I would like to make:
1) Saying the Property Bulls are right is like saying the people who saw green shoots earlier in the year are right. As I explained earlier, if house prices are still climbing at the end of 2010, then the Bulls were right. Sean has jumped the gun with this conclusion and his post wreaks of frustration and impatience (which I totally understand).
2) His anger towards his ‘rich landlord’ is also understandable, even if it misguided (as you point out, his landlord could be a battler too). I can tell you for a fact that right now is THE MOST FRUSTRATING TIME EVER TO BE A RENTER/SAVER!!!! Chairman Rudd is using my taxes to prop up a housing market that I cannot afford to get into. The injustice and stupidity of it all is honestly sending me bonkers…which leads me to my next and final point…
3) Sean, myself and millions of other renters will not stand for this at the next election. I know people claim that polticians have always favour property owners over renters, but the situation is now at breaking point. If Rudd and co continue to roll out polices that prevent the market correction, then there will be a renters political movement at the next election. How do I know this, because I will be leading the charge!!!
PuntPal – Keen didn’t predict the boost to the FHOG, but he did predict interest rates to fall to almost zero, which would have added far more stimulus than the boost, and he did expect Government spending on infrastructure as a stimulus. That is classic Keynsian economics, so I’m not sure if the boost did his prediction in. He just expected us to follow the USA and we usually do, but we got the stimulus and the rate reductions at the right time, whereas in the US it came too late, and the people lost confidence in the government. I read blogs on their sites at night and there is deep division over there. Also once you start a “run” it is difficult to stop, and that is what happened to their housing market. Having non-recourse loans didn’t help either. Many regard it as a right to walk away from debt in the States.
PuntPal I’ve made 200% plus profit on my share trades over the last 6 months buying beaten down stock, whilst those who you say are right have made zip, so I am happy to be wrong a little longer. Mind you I still need to get a little more back, but it is all going the right way.
Good on you, PuntPal. I suspect, though, that collapsing prices will still lock out most people who cannot afford buying at the moment. Why? Because chances are that the banks will have impaired balance sheets, and unless you have enough saved to buy with cash, you won’t be able to get ANY sort of loan to enter the market at what otherwise would be a good time, price-wise, to enter. This is why people tend to enter WHEN they can, not try to time it and wait around for prices to fall. In other words, for those trying to enter, price is only one of potentially a handful of considerations, all of which must come to gether in a favourable way to make entry possible.
But, to change the subject, are you following Marc Faber? He is quite a character, mostly bearish and critical of most things you and I are, but also very astute in pulling together and weighing up the pros and cons of the highly politicised arena we call macroeconomy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUUI-fqwAhw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubxEJxpBva8&feature=related
PuntPal, and all: This link takes you to a channel that collects Faber’s interviews from many different sources, it seems:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=the+marc+faber+channel&search_type=&aq=f
It might be handy for book marking, for those interested in following him.
Good first article Shae. I enjoy the contributions almost as much as the article but the focus of the piece on Talbot was derived from his impression that the information eminating from China relating to its ’stellar’ economy was likely to be unreliable or as Shae put it, China has likely ‘cooked the books’ in Talbot’s opinion. Regardless of who forecast what and when, you would have to think that Talbot’s proposition is quite reasonable. Or perhaps we should just take what this 60 year old totalitarian communist regime feeds to the world concerning its success at ‘managing’ its economy and evolution into a western economic model? In 1930’s Europe Hitler performed an economic miracle too following a devestating collapse of the German and world economies. Different brands of dictatorial power of course but we should all be careful of just what we wish for in respect of China ( and it’s mad junkyard dog North Korea) becoming dominant powers in economic and geopolitical terms. Dangerous days indeed as its highly likely the US won’t simply buckle down or become beholden to Chinese economic life support forever. Sounds unlikely right now but you would have to think that strategists would be planning on ‘bankrupting’ the Chinese success story. Why? Well if there are two things in life that are certain (death & taxes) you can now add a third. Politically, culturally and historically the USA will NOT entertain a communist ’success’ story – EVER. If the past 12 months haven’t taught us anything else it should have at least shown us that CAPITALISM will NEVER be left behind by the US – whatever it takes. If that occurs then the little old gravel pit we call home may not be so shiny in economic terms as our current saviour has to deal with the problem of its very own recession with over a billion restless citizens who have been promised a future middle class life by the regime.
PuntPal, if nothing else, this particular interview with Faber is a gem. He talks about the intricacies of calling a market and the role of central bankers in asset price bubbles, etc. It provides a good view of the way Faber thinks and takes stock of both fundamental and political factors affecting markets. Enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfuiNjvH9_c&feature=fvw
BB – A bankrupt Germany was what made the rise of Adolf Hitler possible in an otherwise democratic european society, and a bankrupt China, especially one that was made at the hands of the West would be extremely dangerous.
Read “The economic consequence of the Peace” by Keynes
Mate that is politics on the lunatic fringe.
I would be more concerned with a collapse of the USA, which seems more likely. The US is already a major aggressor and currently has the largest military potency by far. I shudder to think what nutjob would gain power if the US went through a hyperinflationary situation similar to the Weimar Republic, they are already fed up with their current leadership. Don’t forget Germany was also a cultural and economic powerhouse before WW2, renowned for art, architecture, engineering, and being socially progressive.
Historically, China has a tendency to implode in on itself in the event of crisis and shut itself out.
“”"”"BB – A bankrupt Germany was what made the rise of Adolf Hitler possible in an otherwise democratic european society, and a bankrupt China, especially one that was made at the hands of the West would be extremely dangerous.
Read “The economic consequence of the Peace” by Keynes
Mate that is politics on the lunatic fringe. “”"”
it wasnt hitlers fault ,,he grabbed the jews because they strangled the money,economy & starving the germans in their own country
thats why hitler went apppiccee-shittiest big time on them
its the smoke & mirrors in the background all the time
& who? the rothchilds & rockerfellers etc etc etc
PF – North Korea exists entirely because of China. Please explain how you would describe the politics of that particular state and China’s continued support of it since the 1950’s war with America/South Korea as anything other than indoctrinated lunacy. And lets leave Keynes rot in peace. He was a bean counter employed by the Brits to tally up the compensation ‘costs’ of WWI. Impressive as he was in coming to a conclusion that France had lost precisely 1,650,000 cows as a result of the war, he was simply another economist guessing his way to fame.
“By a continuing process of inflation, government can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens.”
John Maynard Keynes quote
“It is better to be roughly right than precisely wrong”
John Maynard Keynes quote
“Capitalism is the monetary,astounding,cryptic,confounding,illusionanry belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.”
John Maynard Keynes quote
Jason – I agree, I would be very concerned if the USA ever fell into the hands of a lunatic president, and the USA is certainly teetering at the moment. Many Middle East dwellers would argue that George W Bush went close to fitting that nutjob scenario of yours.
BB – Yes North Korea is a basket case, and very dangerous, but you were talking about bankrupting China. If that happened, in such a politically unstable climate, in such a manufacturing giant, almost anything could happen. I suggest that it should be something that the world would be wise to avoid. A successful China is less likely to wage war than a bankrupt one.
etch – definitely disagree with your comments at 27 above. It was Hitlers fault and not caused by any particular nationality, religious group or segment of the population other than Nazi’s themselves. The less said about that the better.
PF .IT IS A TOUCHY subject but to my understanding germany was very well to do & it all went very hyperinflationary ..
wheel barrrows of money to buy a loaf of bread
who, wat caused that ?
my dad got affected by that war & all this ignorance that so & so just went crazy for NO REASON , it was the “reasons ” behind that which people are not educated on & even ww1 & ww2 are closely intertwined about the reasons
some of them reasons are the “ponzis” & their schemes in the background
which is happening now
etch – yes it is touchy. The Second World War had its origins in the onerous conditions demanded by France, the UK, the USA, and other allies when the peace traety was signed in Versailles on 11/11/18.
Despite BB’s remarks about Keynes, the USA followed his advice after WW2 with the Marshall Plan and prevented the same events occurring again. If you expect any country to repay more than it can, the political situation destabilises at the same time that the economy goes into a death spiral. That allowed a criminal like Hitler to gain power when in normal circumstances he would not have had a chance.
Mate it’s a bit off subject, but there is a heap of information available.
if you cant buy a house or save for one, then do what i do pay two months rent then stop paying or come up short each month and wait for a judge to kick u out. then move on to the next money sucking landlord and do the same thing till u have save enough to get into the housing market.
Chad – the flaw in your plan is that no-one will lend to you with court judgements against you. Perhaps you should re-appraise your plan before you paint yourself into a corner.
Better still Chad, continually complain about every possible building defect (including the light globes) that your rental property has to the landlord/agent. Squeaky floors are great so are leaky roofs! Work the building, services and fittings really, really hard, put things down the sewer that will cause it to choke. Flood the bathroom (faulty tap fitting) to get new carpets and move heavy furniture and appliances (the fridge is a beauty) across the floor so that it will crack the floor tiles. Then continually complain and report it all to the Office of Fair Trading. They will get stuck into your unfair landlord for you. Ahhh. the joy of being a property investor!
bb – I can’t believe that you and Chad really think like that.
Obviously you don’t cotton on to sarcasm. It has been my experience as a landlord to have this happen even when I thought I had good tenants. Once you put the rent up they have every reason in their mind to start whingeing. It can start to feel as though you are managing a serviced hotel apartment and your tenant is the hotel guest and calling for room service! My point is that the reality of the rental market (from the landlord perspective) is never as rosy as it is portrayed by the property industry. There are better ways to make a dollar particularly if capital growth is looking negligible at best and risky at worst.
bb – ok I understand. Yes I agree property can be hard work, and as an investor not necessarily the best choice at this moment.
“”"Better still, continually complain about every possible building defect (including the light globes) that your rental property has to the landlord/agent”"
if i had a tenant like that i would give them immeadiate eviction notice.out
etch – tenants have more rights than landlords. You have to go through a strict process to evict them. The rules are there to protect good tenants from bad landlords, but they don’t protect good landlords from bad tenants.
Yes, that, unfortunately, is a very good summary of what is going on.
one months notice ……out
Peter Fraser – That post was not made by Sean Reynolds, or any of the other GHPC aliases it has been spammed under. It was made by one of you weak morons. After doing a google.com.au search on “doom&gloomers” I found this post, and one on somersoft by a property investor by the name of Michael Whyte?
Deranged tactics indeed. Grow up and get a life mate.
Peter Fraser 10.20.09 at 7:41 am
etch – tenants have more rights than landlords. You have to go through a strict process to evict them. The rules are there to protect good tenants from bad landlords, but they don’t protect good landlords from bad tenants.
That’s most definitely not true, and shows a lack of knowledge of landlording and the various Tenancy Acts. Of course you have to go through a ’strict process’, but it’s still quite easy – termination of contract on no grounds, 60 days notice. Falling 2 weeks behind in rent — instant eviction order from the Tribunal. Those are the known conditions under which someone chooses to become a landlord — if you don’t like the rules of the game, take your borrowed speculator’s money elsewhere.
There are *some* rules to protect good tenants from bad landlords, but it requires the tenant to keep going back to the Tribunal to avoid repeated attempst at vengeful eviction. There are also plenty of rules to protect good [sic] landlords from bad [sic] tenants, apart from the all the vetting PMs do in advance with references and database searches etc, as the Tenancy Acts were written mostly with influence from landlords’ lobbies like the REIs. Further, I’d suggest there are far more bad landlords than bad tenants out there.
And, no, I didn’t write the referenced remarks at the Business Spectator above, and I’ve corrected the record over there also.
Leave a Comment
Comment moderation policy: Port Phillip Publishing supports free speech and frank and open conversation. But we reserve the right to modify or delete your comments if we consider them to be offensive or in violation of any laws, including Australia's anti-discrimination laws