News Home Just In Australia World Business Sport Entertainment Weather | Opinion Blogs

Opinion Home Essays Emails Speeches Documents Contact

Olympia Britannica

By David Rowe

Posted August 25, 2008 08:20:00

Rebecca Romero claims gold for Great Britain

Team GB finished the Games ahead of Australia in both gold- and all-medal tallies. (Getty Images)

For a while there it looked like the biggest story surrounding the Beijing Olympics in the Australian media was going to be Tibet, media freedom or human rights. In stricter sporting terms it might have been the rise of China, the Michael Phelps phenomenon, or Jamaican domination of the sprint events in the Olympics.

Closer to home it could have been the familiar triumph of the swimmers, the out-of-the-box performance of Sally McLellan, or the classic triumph over adversity story of Anna Meares.

But no - cue doom-laden music and images of desolation - a pall was cast over the Games that began to obscure all else. It is that the medal table (that isn't supposed to exist in any official sense) showed Team GB ahead of Australia in both gold- and all-medal tallies.

Putting aside the atmospherics for a moment, underlying this dark mood is the business as usual special pleading for Olympic funding. Australian Olympic Committee President John Coates and co, and their predecessors, always have a new tune to play, but with the same chorus. Give us more public money, to the strains of a 1930s Depression anthem that now seems curiously Olympian, "Once I built a tower, up to the sun, brick, and rivet, and lime; Once I built a tower, now it's done. Brother, can you spare a dime?"

Hardly anyone takes seriously, on grounds of stubborn lack of evidence, the old justification that funding Olympic sport makes the nation sportier and healthier, so the pitch is mainly about national pride, tradition and world standing, with a technocratic side-spin on intellectual property exploitation. The plea for more federal funding assiduously ignores the contributions of the State Institutes of Sport, local government, corporate sponsorship and other financial and in-kind support for Olympians, but such relevant details just blur the message.

Post-Montreal 1976 and the 'humiliation' of no gold medals brought the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS) after Eastern Europe and the American colleges showed the way. Before Sydney 2000 it was the need for a good medal haul before a home audience, and afterwards the imperative of maintaining the newly elevated medal count in, first, the home of the modern Olympics, and then the honey pot of contemporary global capital.

Looking towards London 2012, what better line to push than replaying the drama of Federation and the imperative of heading off the embarrassment of a British victory over its former colony in the heart of Old Empire?

Bolstering this plea is the frequent complaint that the Brits are using national lottery money to support the Olympic effort (a trick they learnt from the southern Europeans) and are able to scour the world for the best coaching talent, including, outrageously, Australians.

These quislings, their apoplectic critics imply, should be brought back to face justice in their home nation, perhaps using some of the more extravagant provisions of the Anti-Terrorism Act.

Little, though, is said about the many coaches from overseas at the AIS. Starting with A for Archery there is Kyo Moon Oh from South Korea, then B for Boxing's East German Bodo Andreass, C for Cycling's Martin Barras from Canada, and so on. I'm unaware of calls for dismissal and deportation of these globally mobile sport professionals. Good taste counsels against dwelling on the 1997 hiring by Athletics Australia of Ekkart Arbeit, the East German athlete doper and spy, as head coach. Nor will I mention the nationalities of the current association and rugby football coaches.

Australia will not be too fussy about where it sources its elite Olympic coaches as long they do their main job of beating Britain. Deploying the British spectre to advance the cyclical claim for more Olympic funding is a vivid demonstration that sport, so abstract and bizarre in many respects, is given meaning by its enmeshment in history, politics and culture. Sport for most people only takes on importance when they care about the result and its interpretation, rather than the technical excellence of often arcane contests. Many Australians in the 21st century, it seems, can still have their buttons pushed by resentments stemming from the 19th century.

When Kate Ellis, Australian Minister for Sport, struck a pre-Games wager with her British counterpart that the one boasting fewer Beijing medals would wear the other's colours at their next sporting contest, she wasn't only tapping into the history of Australian nationalism. In the light of Australia's continuing postcolonial nightmare of British ascendancy in sport, she was offering to (and now must) wear a hair shirt and a crown of thorns all the way to the Millennium Dome in 2012.

Professor David Rowe is Director of the Centre for Cultural Research, University of Western Sydney, author of Sport, Culture and the Media: The Unruly Trinity, and an expatriate Brit.

Tags: government-and-politics, federal-government, world-politics, sport, olympics-summer, australia, china, united-kingdom

Search for news

Comments (70)

Comments for this story are closed. No new comments can be added. If you would like to have your say on this issue, you can do so via the Emails section of our Opinion pages.

DeepFritz:

25 Aug 2008 8:55:02am

Britain won the bulk of their medals in 3 sports only and were nowhere near in all the others...

Funnily enough with these sports, they all involved sitting down on your backside (Cycling, Rowing and Sailing)...

Agree (1) Alert moderator
Big Yin:

25 Aug 2008 9:08:39am

The likes of Kate Ellis & John Coates need to go and take a cold shower! All this jingoistic, parochial rubbish, dressed up as nationalistic fervour, by both the UK and Australia, justs goes to show petty-minded insecurity of the Coates' and Ellis' and demeans the effort and performance of ALL the athletes!

Agree (1) Alert moderator
Olympicus:

25 Aug 2008 9:19:46am

The Olympic Games feature many sports which are not culturally or historically significant in this country. Handball, table tennis and gymnastics are but a few examples. Why not introduce Rugby Union, and 20/20 cricket as well? By the way, we should get over the Brits beating us, we were beaten by the better squad fair and square.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Barnes Bugle:

25 Aug 2008 9:24:02am

Don't think that sprinting or boxing involves too much sitting down.

19 gold medals. Remind me again how many you guys and girls got?

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Jim:

25 Aug 2008 9:31:09am

There are very good reasons why Pride and Envy are listed as two of the seven deadly sins.

There are many more serious issues to worry about and find the funding for than to lament our Olympic medal count, especially as ours was in reality also an outstanding performance in relation to the rest of the world.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Spider Dijon:

25 Aug 2008 9:32:34am

Wow, so much text with absolutely no point. The writing is so bland and uninteresting. I want my two minutes back.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Fratelli:

25 Aug 2008 9:48:31am

Who gives a damn? Like Olympicus (25 Aug 2008 9:19:46am) said, many sports in the Games are rarely heard of in AUstralia, let alone played.

The Brits clearly performed better overall over the two weeks, and good on them. Are we expected to win everything? Of course not. Should we also have a problem with the Germans and Russians 'beating us'? No way.

Besides, I think a haul of 46 medals (Britain achieved 47) is a bloody good effort considering we have a population of 21 million, apparently limited funding and the fact that most of the country's pastimes include sports not even played in the Games (AFL, cricket, Union, League etc).

So dry your eyes, congratulate the opposition and show a bit of bloody pride in what our athletes DID achieve, rather than what they didnt.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Lindsay Cooper:

25 Aug 2008 10:03:56am

This media hype over who has the most medals just keeps the stupidity ongoing.
First of all, most sports were meant to be participated in, not critical spectatoring.
I like to see the best sportsperson winning which ever country they come from.
I thought getting people to play sport was the original idea behind sport. Not sitting on your fat arse and criticising people that you would not able to do 1% of what they are capable of.
Why do we worry at all about how many medals each country wins, this is just another egotisical competition encouraged by the people who make a lot of money from the sport. One word sums it all up EGO.
DO YOU KNOW THAT HALF THE WORLD DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TO EAT, CHILDREN ARE STARVING AND YOU THINK THAT SPORT IS SO IMPORTANT.
EGO'S ARE NOT NECESSARY.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Bill:

25 Aug 2008 10:12:19am

It seems to me that the Olympics have become an extravagant entertainment with each host country attempting to outdo its predecessor.The medal count has received unneccessary significance and is far removed from the true spirit of the Olympic games.
Organisers and others who benefit financially are urging increased spending in a bid to win more medals.However,we are told that each gold medal won by an Australian athlete at Beijing cost the taxpayer seventeen million dollars.
There are more deserving priorities.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Stop_the_madness:

25 Aug 2008 10:51:56am

What ever happened to the mantra that "it isn't about winning, it's about taking part"? This obsession with medal tallies sends entirely the wrong message to our kids about what is important in sport.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Ozzie:

25 Aug 2008 11:13:56am

When faced with a Pom, the important point to remember is that Aussies won more medals (gold or any colour) than the English.
Sure, the UK may have just pipped Australia, but only with the help of Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish. Chris 'The Flying Scotsman' Hoy and others will let you know their medals weren't won for England.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
MindBend:

25 Aug 2008 11:43:07am

It would appear that not much has changed since Hitler & his merry band of nutters used the 1936 Berlin games to push the idiotic notion of race-based physical superiority as a tool to build nationalistic fervour.

Clearly nations now see the final medal count as an important measure of their 'power'. No surprise that China now rivals the USA at the top of the table. This is atheltic prowess as a proxy for economic or militaristic strength, and is part of the superiority/inferiority complex that many nations feel relative to their reference group. Are we headed back to the bad old days of 'the West' vs the 'Iron Curtain'? Why should it matter which nation collected the most gold medals or where we rank versus Great Britain? I didn't see any competitor find a cure for cancer or broker a peace plan in the middle east over the past two weeks, so let's keep things in perspective. Other than providing some entertainment, none of these medal winners will significantly alter the world for the better. So let's not fall for that old 'bread and circuses' routine and nationalistic chest-beating again.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Brad:

25 Aug 2008 11:55:41am

No doubt there will be an appeal for more money for elite sport so the AIS-trained athletes can win more gold medals in London.

It already costs is $40 million for every gold medal we win. Spending even more money just to beat the Poms would be obscene when we have so many other pressing social problems in this country. There is absolutely no evidence that winning gold medals contributes anything to this country, e.g. promotes participation in sport. Rising obesity (particularly childhood obesity) is conclusive evidence to the contrary.

Elite sport should pay its own way or go away. Let the commercial media pay for it as they are the only beneficiaries. Our taxes are needed for more important things like health, education, public transport, science, etc.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Dwayne:

25 Aug 2008 12:25:23pm

Britain beats us at a lot of things, I don't cry myself to sleep at night over it though. I go to sleep knowing that we'll eventually beat them at more important things (like; breathing and succeeding at life).

Britain can win a medal, but a drinking contest against Australia (don't flatter yourself). Put sports in the Olympics that we'll be sure to win over many other countries (like Cricket & roo hunting).

Agree (0) Alert moderator
A Pom Abroad:

25 Aug 2008 12:43:41pm

If the Olympics really is all about individual performances and not about nationhood - if nationhood is immaterial, why all these bitter recriminations? And why did we hear nothing about this at Sydney 2000 or Athens 2004? Was it perhaps because you were winning more medals then? Surely the Olympic ideal is also represented by supporters who applaud their team whether they win or lose? It's no use questioning the use of government money now simply because it didn't bring back the expected haul of gold medals.

Questioning the UK's use of national lottery money is pitiful and I would have expected more of a national who has produced a nation of winning sportsmen and who (supposedly) deride the idea of 'whingers'. The UK has done little different to other countries who funnel large amounts of government money into sport and who employ large numbers of foreign coaches. If the UK has done better at that particular game, then surely the answer for your olympic committee is to do better, rather than sulk and whinge and complain that it's all not fair. Or maybe Australia's famous sports stars have given us an inaccurate, overcomplimentary view of the nature of the formiddable and courageous Australia psyche. Maybe we exported whinging out here along with the convicts?

While I'll agree that the Olympics consumes a vast amount of money which could be used elsewhere, you would do well to be wary of abandoning it for reasons of cost-effectiveness. We all need some reflected glow of victory to make us feel that life is more than just a matter of balanced budgets and frugal spending. The Olympics has enlivened a recession-ravaged UK just as it fired up Australia. At $40m a medal, it may be expensive entertainment but it is something you throw away at your peril.

I'll be looking forward to 2012 and another record UK medal haul. If you're all moaning and griping then too, or laughably suggesting England, Scotland, Wales and Northen Ireland compete separately to help you out (what next, should Queensland and New South Wales compete separately too) then you'll probably be exactly where you are on the medal table now - or lower.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Doug Mc:

25 Aug 2008 1:08:22pm

When you look at the top medal winning countries and their huge populations and then you see Australia, who cares where we ended up 4th, 6th or 10th, we did amazingly well for a small country and we should be so very proud of our athletes, to punch above their weight in so many areas.

Let the poms have their moment of glory, as when China and India hit their peak in the future, good luck to any other country getting more than a mere handful of medals in any sport.

I say well done all the small nations, such as Jamaica, New Zealand and Denmark, as these small nations should be crowing about their results much more than GB or Australia.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
jak:

25 Aug 2008 1:15:21pm

"In the light of Australia's continuing postcolonial nightmare of British ascendancy in sport"

LOL - Cheeky comments like this is the reason why I love seeing England consistently fail in sport; whether it is watching them fail to make a major soccer tournament, or losing the Ashes 5-0, or not having anyone ever make any progress in Wimbledon. Rare moments of success, like the last olympics or the ashes several years ago, merely keep the contest interesting.

I'm not sure why he reads a post colonial past into this as most Australians are descended from people who migrated here after colonialism: I just like watching england lose because it is fun.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
barneseye:

25 Aug 2008 1:47:12pm

Apparently, each of our gold medals cost 'us' (the aust people) $16M. Yet I understand that as soon as each gold medalist obtains their gold medal, companies start courting them for multi-million dollar endorsement contracts. How about repaying the debt so that funding for future sports-people can continue/expand?

I am a professional with a professional size HECs debt. Because of my success, I repay it. Should this (sport) be any different? Any athlete that receives money from the Aust people who recieves financial benefit from our investment should be asked to repay a certain amount, or have to forgo a certain amount of the contract amount.

Whaddyareckon?

Agree (1) Alert moderator
Trevor:

25 Aug 2008 1:57:27pm

It's almost embarrassing to watch people like Coates complain about our 'low' medal tally. Given our population, we actually do ridiculously well to be in the top half-dozen nations.

I suspect what we're lacking is not medals, but perspective.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
James Mason:

25 Aug 2008 2:21:54pm

As the Barmy Army likes to sing to Australians, whenever they are visiting 'Down Under', "Get your S--T stars off our flag!"

Agree (0) Alert moderator
pk:

25 Aug 2008 2:32:21pm

Well, thanks the Lord that's over. Good to see the Wallabies win in Sth Africa for the first time in 8 years. A lot more relevant than the last 3 weeks of badminton/handball/rowing/zzzzzz

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Spot:

25 Aug 2008 3:08:09pm

Sounds like a stoush between people who used to rule the world and people who think they should rule the world.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Lionel:

25 Aug 2008 3:13:22pm

Let's get real about this gold medal nonsense!

If you rate the number of gold medals won by each nation against the population, you get:

1. Jamaica
2. Bahrain
3. Estonia
4. New Zealand
5. Georgia
6. AUSTRALIA
7. Norway
8. Slovakia
9. Slovenia
10. Latvia

China, USA, GB, Germany,Russia don't even get on the top 10 list!

The bad news is we are behind NZ!!!!!!!!!

Cheers,

Lionel

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Jim:

25 Aug 2008 3:30:13pm

Frankly I think that Great Britain will be more annoyed at having come behind Germany than elated at having beaten Australia. After all, with a population three times the size they should have the resources to beat Australia every time. The fact that they havn't done so regularly is the real aberration.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Dave:

25 Aug 2008 3:35:25pm

Perhaps someone should do a medal tally based on the countries' standard of living.

Funny, I didn't see Norway, Sweden, Canada, Switzerland anywhere near the top of the medal tables.

Perhaps other important aspects of life are being sacrificed so we can win a few more gold medals in sports most people don't care about.

I'm not trying to be a bore and I don't think it is a waste to spend some money on arts, sports and other forms of non-essential community entertainment. But there is something definetly not right when we are near the top of the medal table with the population we have.

I read that the entire Canadian Olympic program cost $25 million and this was an increased amount because they have the Olympics in 2010. How much did we spend on the Olympics here? Could some of that money be better spent on health, education, roads etc???

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Travis:

25 Aug 2008 3:52:18pm

I don't think that the Olympic Games, the one true world event, should be played out as a competition between two countries - Australia and Great Britain. Best leave that for the Ashes.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
henalf:

25 Aug 2008 4:03:09pm

What about some of the billions being spent on sport,going to the pensioners. Uk and Australia are both low down in the pensioner tables. Talk about Nero fiddling whist Rome burnt! It would be interesting to know just how much these sporting colleges cost the taxpayer.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
bullfrog:

25 Aug 2008 4:52:50pm

The Olympics seem to be the 'circuses' of the 'bread and circuses' to keep the masses happy.

Personally, I'd prefer more the bread side (like increasing the pension, or improving public hospitals, or improving the schools, or, or, or) rather than celebration of elitism.

I can't help but think of the medical research that could have been funded, or new teaching spots, or even mass training of physical education teachers, which at least might have increased the participation rate.

Elitism - so wrong, unless its sport.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
leone:

25 Aug 2008 5:33:28pm

Durng the first week of the games a small and insignificant item appeared briefly in our sports-obsessed media. It said that Australian scientists had made an important breakthrough in determining the cause of leukaemia. This would help in the development of a new treatment which, it was hoped, would prevent the disease developing.

While meatheads who managed to swim or run faster than a bunch of other meatheads were being feted as heroes by our fawning media the scientists who might have found a way to prevent a deadly disease were ignored. I know who the true heroes are here.

Just a small fraction of the funds showered on elite sportspersons might see this treatment come to fruition but pigs will fly before that happens. It's more important for one more pampered athlete to win one more medal before buggering off to make squillions out of promoting muesli bars or undies than it is to develop a way to prevent a disease which kills.

Now we are being deluged with pleas for more sports funding in the hope that more cash will equal a win over the poms in 2012. What a colossal waste.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
rb:

25 Aug 2008 8:03:03pm

Once-Upon-A-Time, the Olympic Games were for amateurs only. If an individual was paid a brass razoo for his/her athletic prowess, then he/she was automatically disqualified from participating in any Olympics. Period. No arguments!

The opposite applies these days. Millions of dollars are made by athletes winning gold medals, while most amateurs have a chance of a snowflake in hell of competing successfully at an Olympic level.

Now and then an individual appears with natural talent (e.g., Jamaica's Usain Bolt) that beats the pants off the competition without seemingly trying very hard. These were the individuals who prevailed at the early Olympics without training day in and day out!

Many of the modern athletes seem to train well beyond the capacity of their bodies to absorb such punishment, just to chase that elusive gold medal. That would explain the constant physical brake-downs, strains and muscle tears in many of our athletes.

Which brings me to the point of population numbers. The larger the population the more the chances of finding sufficiently gifted individual(s) to chase world records and Olympic glory.

Australia has been punching well above its weight (population wise) in modern Olympics for many decades now. Our 14 gold medals (and 46 overall) compares quite favourably with Great Britain's 19 and 47 respectively, in view of the disparity in our respective population numbers.

Furthermore, the Brits have millions of pounds (from lotteries I believe) to throw at their athletes, so it is no wonder that theirs were more past-the-post-first than ours.

There is a massage in this somewhere - Australian government(s) PLEASE take note!!

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Adrian Matthews:

25 Aug 2008 9:08:14pm

Fact is, I didn't lift a finger to help "Team GB" (yuk!) to win a single gold or anything else. OK, the government took some tax off me and I did buy a couple of lottery tickets in the last 4 years. I'm just glad to know so many people put their heart and soul into taking part. And I did enjoy watching some amazingly perfect performances from all over the world, though deeply troubled at times by the location's reported treatment of its own people. If some of my compatriots are stupid enough to crow about victories they likewise have done nothing significant to achieve, and if some Australians are feeling aggrieved because "they" didn't do as well as hoped, I don't think I'm going to be too worried about that. I'm looking forward to London 2012 as a big party to be enjoyed - surely it can't be as bad as the 8 minute handover slot?! Couldn't really care less if more British (UK?) or Australians win gold, or which percentage population, or who gets the biggest haul of all medals ( USA's preferred option because they do better that way) or any other way a country tries to validate itself.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Andrew:

25 Aug 2008 10:12:22pm

Last year, I was cleaning up my house for selling and pulled up the lino in the kitchen cupboards to find 50 year old women's magazines laid beneath. The gossip pages and the comment writings seemed mostly concerned with what was going on in London in relation to Australians living there. How our plays were better than theirs, but were being unfairly criticised, how unfriendly their buses were at the side of ours, how our morals and values remained superior to theirs. We were humble but wholesome Australians, held as victims of our circumstances, but traversing above our previous colonial masters on all fields of endeavour.

We really need to grow up.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Meniga:

26 Aug 2008 12:05:23am

Considering the population of Australia compared to all of the countries in the top 10 of the medals tally I believe we have done remarkably well, not only in medals but having Aussies there competing in a wide range of sports regardless of whether or not they won medals.

Some of us (hopefully most of us) are proud of all our athletes who put so much time and effort into training and preparation to represent our great country of Australia.

Go Aussie Oi Oi Oi !

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Jason:

26 Aug 2008 5:22:02am

Well written, sir. I've long since lost interest in the politics of sport. At a time when our hospitals are falling apart, we're facing a potential recession, and the minerals boom looks like coming to an inglorious end; the last thing we need is yet more multi-million dollar special pleading from sports apparatchiks like Coates, et al.

Australia's reputation in sport is already well-established. We don't need to spend like drunken sailors to maintain it, especially not on the farce that the Olympic movement has become.

From Berlin to Beijing, the only consistent theme of the Olympics is its' utter irrelevance to reality. The original Olympiads were meant to be a time of peace, where city-states would lay aside their quarrels, and compete under the aegis of the gods.

It'd never happen, but the only way to make the Olympics relevant is to go back to basics. Have one prize for first place, the proverbial laurel wreath, and don't bother maintaining performance records.

In a stroke, you'd almost solve the problem of doping, remove the justification for nationalist sabre ratttling, and put a sock in the incessant bleating of Messrs Coates and Co.

It'll never happen, but.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
monica:

26 Aug 2008 7:31:52am

The poms couldn't organise a mothers day fete, so it will be interesting event, a comedy I am sure. As for English sports people, Eddie the Eagle symbolises them perfectly, they try hard and every now and then they fluke one.

Agree (0) Alert moderator

Feature

Reforming paedophiles

The Anglican Church is reaching out to paedophiles who want to rejoin the Christian community.

Listen

First Test

NZ paceman Tim Southee speaks to Grandstand after ripping through Australia's top order.

Gallery

SE Qld flooding

Photos of flooded streets and storm damage caused by more wild weather.

Just In

Site Map

Sections

Media

Contribute

Feedback

This service may include material from Agence France-Presse (AFP), APTN, Reuters, AAP, CNN and the BBC World Service which is copyright and cannot be reproduced.

AEDT = Australian Eastern Daylight Time which is 11 hours ahead of UTC (Greenwich Mean Time)

Opinion

Olympia Britannica

Search for news

Comments (70)

DeepFritz:

Daze:

Wortho:

Neal:

Ads:

Big Yin:

PaulB:

MO:

Brad:

mark:

simon:

Jim Bendfeldt:

Brad:

Bruce:

Olympicus:

twobob:

Barnes Bugle:

Sam Guest:

Bill:

Dan:

Sam Guest:

Jim:

Spider Dijon:

Fratelli:

Lindsay Cooper:

Joe:

Bill:

faholo:

Stop_the_madness:

United Discord:

Tom:

Ozzie:

Joe:

Jim:

Joe:

Fast Ferret:

MindBend:

Brad:

Olympic Fan:

Brad:

John R:

Dwayne:

JayR:

A Pom Abroad:

Doug Mc:

jak:

barneseye:

RoseR:

Brad:

Trevor:

James Mason:

pk:

Spot:

Lionel:

Will:

Jim:

Dave:

Fratelli:

Travis:

henalf:

Brad:

bullfrog:

leone:

rb:

Adrian Matthews:

Andrew:

Andrew:

Meniga:

Jason:

monica:

Feature

Reforming paedophiles

Listen

First Test

Gallery

SE Qld flooding