Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Hi All My original thread on this subject is here: http://www.pomsinoz.com/forum/migration-issues/71907-protest-visit-australia-house-london.html I got home today to find a letter (brought by the postman) from a Mr David Wilden. His job-title seems to be, "Minister-Counsellor Immigration) Regional Director Europe." The letter is on the headed paper of the Australian High Commission in London. Mr Wilden reckons that dealing with our group-complaint is his responsibility. He says that he is willing to meet with a group of British GSM applicants on 30th November as requested. He says that only one of the rooms in the High Commission complex in London is large enough for 50 or so people and he does not know whether the large room is available on the 30th. He asks instead that a smaller representative group of no more than 10-15 Poms in Oz members should attend unless we can arrange a larger venue elsewhere by ourselves. I suspect that Mr Wilden would be prepared to meet us elsewhere in Central London if we organise the venue. Can anyone lay hands on a larger venue that would not cost anything, please? If not, I see no harm in limiting the attendees to 15 and the rest can rely on updates from the attendees? I don't think we need a lot of bodies in the room in order to get the point across that over 140,000 GSM visa applicants are seriously upset about the 23rd September changes and seriously out of pocket as a result of them. Peter Mares has already hammered that fact into the Minister's head now, on national radio in Oz. The MIA have hammered it home too: Submission to the Minister - General Skilled Migration http://mia.org.au/media/File/091113_GSM_Submission_to_Minister__final.pdf Mr Wilden's letter makes it plain that he is not prepared to divulge any information which has not already been put into the public domain by the Minister or by DIAC and he makes it clear that he will not say anything we don't already know unless DIAC has made a further announcement by then - which seems unlikely. The rest of Mr Wilden's letter is the same uninformative waffle (completely lacking in transparency or hard fact) which has characterised DIAC's secretive handling of the GSM Fiasco. God knows why every ounce of information has to be dragged out of them. DIAC would have done FAR better to have fronted up with the truth at the outset instead of waiting for the Minister to make a complete clot of himself with his failed Plans A & B and his and DIAC's sudden U-turn on 23rd September. The shambolic way that he and DIAC have handled the GSM Fiasco makes all of them look completely incompetent and secretive into the bargain. Which has ensured that nobody respects either Minister Evans or his Department chiefs any longer. Could people please re-confirm whether you still want a - probably uninformative and inconclusive - meeting with Mr Wilden on Monday 30th November and if so, who definitely wants to attend, please? Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stellathedog Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 At last a response from them, however unhelpful! Gill, I don't have an application in for a visa. I am more than willing to make up numbers for you should you need me. I hope all those with applications in and reason to complain, get the chance to have their say. Shout if I'm needed. Good luck with it! Cheers Pam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie ellis Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Good luck with that gill , its a bit far for me to come down there , would have liked to come down just to boot his a--e:cute: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 17th November 2009 Dear Ms [Gill/Gollywobbler] Thank you for your recent letter to Mr John Dauth LVO, the Australian High Commissioner, setting out your concerns in regards to the recent changes to the General Skilled Migration program. As the senior officer responsible for Immigration matters, the High Commissioner has asked me to respond on his behalf. As you pointed out in your letter, the Australian Government has made a number of changes to the program that took effect from 23rd September 2009. The changes were driven by several factors, the primary one being the impact of the global economic crisis and its effect on the Australian Economy. This required a review of where the pressure points would be in the different fields of employment and how best the program could be targeted for the 2009/’10 year. It is worth noting that despite these changes, the government is still running the second biggest migration program in Australia’s history, with an increased focus on employer sponsored, State Government sponsored and family categories. It is acknowledged that while the majority of people who have applied for permanent skilled migration to Australia since 1st January 2009 are not significantly affected by the changes, there are a small cadre who have lodged applications who now find that their expectations of a move to Australia in a relatively short period may now in fact be delayed as they do not fall into the priority categories. The Government has published information on the impact of these changes, highlighting the fact that in some circumstances the decision to grant a visa may be delayed by several years. The options for applicants that fall into this category are set out on the Department of Immigration and Citizenship website. http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/skilled-occupations/occupations-in-demand.htm The Minister has received representations from people within this group requesting information on the options currently available. In particular the issue of refunds for people in this situation has been raised. At this stage the government is considering a range of options in regards to the people affected by the changes. When the government has reviewed all the options, if they consider that further changes need to be made then these will be widely advertised. The Government is monitoring Australia’s economic situation closely and the current priority processing directions will be reviewed in the light of any changes to the economic circumstances and how these flow through to the need for specific skills. You have requested a meeting with the High Commissioner on this matter and propose bringing 50-100 people. As this is my area of responsibility, I will be the key person to meet with on these issues. I note your request for a meeting on 30th November. Whilst I will happily meet with a delegation on this day, there is no guarantee that there will be any more information I can provide you with other than what is already in the public arena. I would also propose that any meeting that is to be held in the High Commission be of a more modest size. There is only one room that can accommodate that many people and I am unsure of its availability at this point. The High Commission is also a secure building so all attendees would have to go through Security screening. If you wish to meet on 30th November with the larger group then perhaps another venue can be found. If, however, you wish to meet at the High Commission, could I propose that the group be limited to 10-15 delegates from your broader group. If you wish to discuss the options and how to proceed, please call me direct on 0207 xxx xxxx. Yours sincerely David Wilden Minister-Counsellor (Immigration) Regional Director Europe Hi All Above is the letter to me from Australia House. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tomatohead Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 well done Gill , hopefully it can show them how sharply people feel about this subject cheers Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest danBN1 Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Hi Gill I am definitely up for attending and would very much appreciate being on the list of attendees. I don't know of any venues in London though, sorry. Pls let me know if it's still going ahead, location, time etc Best regards Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Hi Gill I am definitely up for attending and would very much appreciate being on the list of attendees. I don't know of any venues in London though, sorry. Pls let me know if it's still going ahead, location, time etc Best regards Dan Hi Dan The date is Monday 30th November. I've asked for the meeting with the Aussies to start at noon. I would suggest that everyone attending needs to be at Australia House in the Strand by 11.30am so as to do the security screening described in Mr Wilden's letter. Please count yourself as definitely included in the list of attendees since you are the first to day, "Yes - me!" Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ali Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Well done Gill and those attending for bringing this together Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jimpy Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 good luck gill, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKlaut Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Well done Gill!! Unfortunately I cannot be there with you for the meeting (I'm not in the UK) but I will support the idea in every possible way. I think we should arrange maximum media coverage for the topic with no difference how many people will actually be there to state our questions. There are thousands of us here. I also want to mention that it's a huge lie to say that: "It is acknowledged that while the majority of people who hav applied for permanent skilled migration to Australia since 1st January 2009 are not significantly affected by the changes, there are a small cadre who have lodged applications who now find that their expectations of a move to Australia in a relatively short period may now in fact be delayed as they do not fall into the priority categories." The person just don't know what he's talking about! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Hi McKLaut Thanks very much for your support. The transcripts of the two Peter Mares interviews are now available: Migration applicants stuck in two-year limbo - The National Interest - 30 October 2009 Immigration Minister responds to backlog concerns - The National Interest - 13 November 2009 Turning to the letter to me: the majority of people who have applied for permanent skilled migration to Australia since 1st January 2009 are not significantly affected by the changes, Rubbish. The CSL was not given overriding prominence until almost 9 months later. there are a small cadre who have lodged applications who now find that their expectations of a move to Australia in a relatively short period may now in fact be delayed as they do not fall into the priority categories. This "small cadre" of people have lodged 140,000 visa applications between them according to Australia's Minister for Immigration in his interview with Peter Mares. That is not a "small" number of applicants by anybody's standards. Even the Minister wasn't spoodly enough to try to describe it as a "small" problem. The Minister has received representations from people within this group requesting information on the options currently available. The most unreliable migration agent on the planet is the Minister for Immigration. Nobody has asked him for advice. He has received a storm of complaints, though, which are both justifiable and justified. The Government has published information on the impact of these changes, highlighting the fact that in some circumstances the decision to grant a visa may be delayed by several years. This is an admission that there is a very much larger cadre, is it - who even DIAC admit will now be caused delays lasting "several years"? Their words, not mine. It is worth noting that despite these changes, the government is still running the second biggest migration program in Australia’s history, with an increased focus on employer sponsored, State Government sponsored and family categories. What does the Family Stream have to do with the GSM program? State sponsorship is now almost irrelevant unless the occupation is on the Canberra-devised CSL. Employer sponsorship is providing PR for people who are already in Oz on subclss 457 visas - 80% of the ENS visas granted in recent months have been granted to the holders of sc 457 visas. Employer-sponsorship is NOT solving any problems for the onshore GSM applicants languishing on Bridging Visas and it is NOT solving any problems for people who are thousands of miles from Australia either. Grrrrr.:realmad::mad: Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted November 19, 2009 Share Posted November 19, 2009 Said individual may not be able to say anything that is not in the public domain already, but he can certainly take points of importance relating to persons affected, and report back to you after taking instructions from Canberra. Many are known already, but I suggest for starters: 1. Why State and Territory sponsorships are now being downplayed in importance - after the Minister has in the past made great play of the delegation of skilled migration initiatives to regional areas/State Government his downgrading of s/c 176 and 475 apps without a CSL occupation is a reversal of past policy. How can State and Territory Governments manage their identified local skills shortages when such applications will be taking some 3 years to process to a decision? 2. The finalisation of non CSL applications where meds and penals have been requested by DIAC and paid for by applicants is a matter requiring urgent clarification. Failing to progress these applications to a decision without appropriate financial compensation is at odds with natural justice and fair play. 3. Time delay is inherent in the skilled program. Decisions made today will have far reaching consequences in terms of meeting Australia's skills needs for several years hence. The Minister cannot expect to flick the switch on and off, expecting skilled individuals to respond - he is in a position of trust, and intending migrants with families and financial commitments expect transparency and consistency so they can make informed decisions. Good luck to all attending. Don't expect too much concrete on the day; use the opportunity to make coherent points (I'm sure Gill will ensure this is done), and ask the AHC person if he can please report back by (say) 21/12/2009 - with no spin and commentary on how Australia must choose numbers based on economic circumstances. We know all of this already. Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WoodyXRomford Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 Best of luck to Gill and the crusaders, not being in the UK is all thats stopping me from attending. At least we can get the main key questions (like Alans big 3) across to someone, lets hope they actually give a damn. I personally think the 10-15 number would be better than a large crowd, maybe a representative from each affected visa class and position perhaps?? I assume that there will be at least one from the "176-NonCSL-with-Meds-PCs-already-met" corner? Make sure its someone who rubs salt in their eyes before the meet to show the pain and sadness and maybe they could even open their wallet/purse at regular intervals showing how little money is left inside for more Meds etc! ) We'll be thinking of you on Monday week! PS. Dont forget to come up with some sort of name for the group that can be turned into a useful acronym....you can't get anywhere in Oz without an acronym!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazzarazza Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 What does the Family Stream have to do with the GSM program? State sponsorship is now almost irrelevant unless the occupation is on the Canberra-devised CSL. Employer sponsorship is providing PR for people who are already in Oz on subclss 457 visas - 80% of the ENS visas granted in recent months have been granted to the holders of sc 457 visas. Employer-sponsorship is NOT solving any problems for the onshore GSM applicants languishing on Bridging Visas and it is NOT solving any problems for people who are thousands of miles from Australia either. Grrrrr. Gill Firstly, thanks again for all your hard work and a BIG CONGRATS on getting them to agree to meet with you. Go get 'em girl! :wink: I don't think they mean the Family stream - I think they mean the 176 and 475 GSM applicants who have family sponsorship rather than State sponsorship (such as our daughter). They are only processing CSL occupations for their category too, so if you are only on the SOL you have no chance of being processed until 2012 even though you have close family to come and stay with. This makes family sponsorship virtually irrelevant too unless they are hiding something from us. Grrrr indeed. Cheers, Kazza xx :hug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest floater Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 I have the day booked off if you would like me to attend. I'm a 176 that was family sponsored and switched to state sponsored, to no avail it would seem, two sets of meds done, weeks away from a visa grant. Just let me know, i'm coming from suffolk so its not too far. Richie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 I have the day booked off if you would like me to attend. I'm a 176 that was family sponsored and switched to state sponsored, to no avail it would seem, two sets of meds done, weeks away from a visa grant. Just let me know, i'm coming from suffolk so its not too far. Richie Hi Richie Please come with us to Australia House. I suggest meeting in the main lobby or whatever they have from about 11.30am onwards, with a view to kick off with Mr Wilden at noon sharp. Many thanks Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 Firstly, thanks again for all your hard work and a BIG CONGRATS on getting them to agree to meet with you. Go get 'em girl! :wink:I don't think they mean the Family stream - I think they mean the 176 and 475 GSM applicants who have family sponsorship rather than State sponsorship (such as our daughter). They are only processing CSL occupations for their category too, so if you are only on the SOL you have no chance of being processed until 2012 even though you have close family to come and stay with. This makes family sponsorship virtually irrelevant too unless they are hiding something from us. Grrrr indeed. Cheers, Kazza xx :hug: Hi Kazza Thanks for your post. I think you said that your daughter has returned to the UK? If so, is she in London by any chance? If not, I was planning to use her as one of the examples of how the latest U-turn is keeping families apart and separated by thousands of miles when family unity is supposed to be one of the cornerstones of the Rudd Government's thinking. Would it be OK with you and your daughter if I mention her case specifically, please? Many thanks Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest June Pixie Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 I would like to ask him in view of the changes if any refund of visa application monies is going to be offered to those who don't trust the Australian government with their $2525 over the next 2/3 years until the non CSL queue gets picked up again? Who's to say retrospective changes will not happen again? I have not frontloaded meds or police checks, luckily, or sold my house but I plainly don't trust that government to follow through with anything now. Is that a country I want to live in? An expendable work force? They will come running with their sunny Bondi Beach TV adverts to the UK again when it goes down the pan. Alan is spot on to say that skilled educated workers from the UK and wherever else cannot and WILL NOT put up with this. I don't believe people are that desperate to get into Australia. If you need my opinion and wish list ,I can come down from Newcastle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlino Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 thanks gill! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlino Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 I'd have 50 to as many as 140,000 people attend, and maybe a handful of representatives doing the talking. They need to seriously know that behind these online applications, there are human beings, lives of families involved. We're stakeholders too, without us there wouldn't be a skilled migration program. Treat us with respect and dignity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlino Posted November 20, 2009 Share Posted November 20, 2009 I think anyone who can make it should attend the meeting. He's asking for no more than 15 people to be present, just affirming his belief that a "small cadre" of people are affected. It's a protest, albeit a civil one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Dear Ms [Gill/Gollywobbler] Thank you for your recent letter to Mr John Dauth LVO, the Australian High Commissioner, setting out your concerns in regards to the recent changes to the General Skilled Migration program. As the senior officer responsible for Immigration matters, the High Commissioner has asked me to respond on his behalf. As you pointed out in your letter, the Australian Government has made a number of changes to the program that took effect from 23rd September 2009. The changes were driven by several factors, the primary one being the impact of the global economic crisis and its effect on the Australian Economy. This required a review of where the pressure points would be in the different fields of employment and how best the program could be targeted for the 2009/’10 year. It is worth noting that despite these changes, the government is still running the second biggest migration program in Australia’s history, with an increased focus on employer sponsored, State Government sponsored and family categories. It is acknowledged that while the majority of people who have applied for permanent skilled migration to Australia since 1st January 2009 are not significantly affected by the changes, there are a small cadre who have lodged applications who now find that their expectations of a move to Australia in a relatively short period may now in fact be delayed as they do not fall into the priority categories. The Government has published information on the impact of these changes, highlighting the fact that in some circumstances the decision to grant a visa may be delayed by several years. The options for applicants that fall into this category are set out on the Department of Immigration and Citizenship website. http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/skilled-occupations/occupations-in-demand.htm The Minister has received representations from people within this group requesting information on the options currently available. In particular the issue of refunds for people in this situation has been raised. At this stage the government is considering a range of options in regards to the people affected by the changes. When the government has reviewed all the options, if they consider that further changes need to be made then these will be widely advertised. The Government is monitoring Australia’s economic situation closely and the current priority processing directions will be reviewed in the light of any changes to the economic circumstances and how these flow through to the need for specific skills. You have requested a meeting with the High Commissioner on this matter and propose bringing 50-100 people. As this is my area of responsibility, I will be the key person to meet with on these issues. I note your request for a meeting on 30th November. Whilst I will happily meet with a delegation on this day, there is no guarantee that there will be any more information I can provide you with other than what is already in the public arena. I would also propose that any meeting that is to be held in the High Commission be of a more modest size. There is only one room that can accommodate that many people and I am unsure of its availability at this point. The High Commission is also a secure building so all attendees would have to go through Security screening. If you wish to meet on 30th November with the larger group then perhaps another venue can be found. If, however, you wish to meet at the High Commission, could I propose that the group be limited to 10-15 delegates from your broader group. If you wish to discuss the options and how to proceed, please call me direct on 0207 xxx xxxx. Yours sincerely David Wilden Minister-Counsellor (Immigration) Regional Director Europe l Hi Gill If it's not too late to add some thoughts to the reply - Dear David Thank you for your letter, a letter that clearly needs correction. The statement that the changes are driven by the GFC are not the main reason for the change. The fact is there are more applicants in the queue than the annual quota can deal with, and has been so for some time. In the UK, the GFC means house prices and business sales values have plummeted, and this couple with the strong AUD vs GBP means many people now have insufficient funds with which to migrate, so the GFC has reduced the size of the UK market, and this would be reflected in many other countries too. DIAC may in fact be lucky that the GFC happened otherwise you might have even more applicants. I do note that the main occupations being processed swiftly are ones where the State Governments have the greatest problem in recruitment - health - and where the anti-GDC stimulus packages are being worked on - mostly civil engineering - and both categories have been in supply shortage for several years before the GFC occured. The skills being held back with lower priority applications are drawn from all walks of life. I am sure that the employers of non-engineers and non-medical personnel are not thanking you for cutting off the supply of their skilled workers. Please do not try to lay red herrings in front of us, and please do not just mirror what others have told you if you do not know the facts for yourself. The "small cadre" to which you refer are insulted at being diminished in this way. As non-CSL we actually number more than two thirds of skills visa applications, that is, we are THE MAJORITY of applications received by DIAC each year. The ones who are NOT affected are a small cadre, ONLY one third of applications. We are also not just a cadre. We are people. Calling us a cadre allows you and DIAC to treat us as a number to be pigeon holed without thought for the outcomes at our end of things. Please call us "people", "individuals" or "applicants", in line with DIAC's rally cry "People Our Business". Were DIAC and the Minister to actually acknowledge that people are indeed DIAC's customers, then the Minister would allow a freezing of applicant ages for already lodged applications. As it stands, people are locked into applications that are frozen, yes, frozen, for some three years and family members (as real persons) are ageing, meaning some are going to be too old when the visa is eventually processed - assuming it ever will be with these constant changes to priorities, points, occupation lists and actual list existance. It is quite clear that the Australian Government no longer respects our commitment in money and effort to migrate there. And here we are believing all the research and Ministerial comment that encourages applicants to have an English language education, English language skills, English language training programmes and English language work experience. Any reply form you now or in the meeting indicating that we can now just get an employer to sponsor us shows that you are not aware of the obtsacles we face in doing so. Getting a job in another country requries building new networks, repackaging of skill sets, dropping position on the career ladder, and a great deal of time. Time costs money, real money, our money, for such things as accommodation, transportation and food running households in two countries. As an estimate, a UK migrant spending the average 3 months in Australia to find a reasonable job that doesn't involve driving taxi or making coffee needs to allow around $12,000 to $14,000 in expenses PLUS foregoing a UK wage while in Australia, so add that up to around $20,000 to $24,000 just to TRY and find employment. Add that to the $4,000 to $10,000 application and migration agent costs (where used), and around $20,000 for furniture relocation and airfares, and you can see that we are being asked to commit $44,000 to $54,000 "to bless Australia with our presence". To say nothing of the recruitment agents and employers who will even interview a migrant because they mistakenly believe we need to already hold a visa to be able to apply for a job. That employer misunderstanding is nothing other than a communication failure by DIAC. We wish to make sure that the Minister and staff in DIAC understand the ethical, moral and legal implications of these changes and their effects on the PEOPLE who make the applications. We also wish to see a sustainable ongoing migration flow from the UK to Australia. We do not at present believe that the Minister and his staff are so informed or indeed aware of the what they have actually done. This needs to be changed. We are not asking you to tell us things and offer more information that is not already in the public domain, we know plenty about what is going on and certainly more than you appear to give us credit for. We will not attend the meeting if you are just diplomatically encouraging us to turn up, drink the usual cup of tea to be poured with free platitiudes and blow off some steam. I assure you we can blow off more steam than Australia House air conditioning can handle! And more steam again when we are on the pavement with the tv cameras rolling. We would be pleased to meet with you if you are prepared to take us seriously and represent our views to the Minister and DIAC management after you hear them. >>>>>>>>>> Hmm, not sure which smilie to use, this :wubclub: or this :Randy-git:. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Jamie, A quick note to say that the age of the main skilled applicant is frozen at the date the visa application is delivered to the ASPC. See you on Weds. Best regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazzarazza Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Hi Kazza Thanks for your post. I think you said that your daughter has returned to the UK? If so, is she in London by any chance? If not, I was planning to use her as one of the examples of how the latest U-turn is keeping families apart and separated by thousands of miles when family unity is supposed to be one of the cornerstones of the Rudd Government's thinking. Would it be OK with you and your daughter if I mention her case specifically, please? Many thanks Gill Hi Gill. She is back in the UK and I already mentioned your proposed visit to London, a couple of weeks ago, but she is up in the wet North West and would find it very difficult to attend, unfortunately. You can most certainly use our case in your discussions. If you need any further information, on top of what you already know, please don't hesitate to ask. Cheers, Kazza :hug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazzarazza Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Jamie, A quick note to say that the age of the main skilled applicant is frozen at the date the visa application is delivered to the ASPC. See you on Weds. Best regards. Hi Alan. Is he not referring to those with family members (eg. teenage children) who may be too old in 3 years time. I believe there are quite a few on here in that situation. Cheers, Kazza. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.