Northern Irish brewer William Mayne is about to get an early taste of Brexit’s implications. Mayne, 25, produces beers with names like ‘Small Axe’ and ‘Brainwashed’ in distinctive, brightly-colored cans. New labeling rules being considered in Ireland to lay out the risks associated with alcohol might mean he has to tone down that characteristic branding in his closest potential export market -- across the border. “Because we are so agile and used to small printing runs, the new legislation is more of an annoyance than a complete barrier to trade,” said Mayne, who has just started selling his Bullhouse Brewery beers in Ireland. “Where I can see the future difficulties are in differentiating our products from bland, mass-produced, cheap beers. Our branding is fairly distinct.” The alcohol question illustrates wider concerns facing British exporters should the U.K. move away from European Union rules after it exits the bloc. Warning of spiraling costs, the Confederation of British Industry is cautioning against a “bonfire of regulation,” while Irish-U.K. trade could shrink by almost 10 percent because of red tape demanded by Brexit, Ireland’s central bank said this month. The proposed labeling requirements in Ireland means “producers and distributors that supply products to Ireland will have to create labels specifically for the Irish market, which will be costly and logistically difficult,” said Patricia Callan, director of the Alcohol Beverage Federation of Ireland, which represents drinks companies. Trade BarriersFor British firms as a whole, the issue could be replicated across thousands of products after Brexit if the U.K. changes domestic rules to make a dramatic break from the EU after it exits the single market. Ireland’s unilateral labeling proposal is not a done deal. The European Commission has raised concerns that it could hamper drinks exports to Ireland, and suggested it may breach EU law, the drinks industry said. In response to questions, the Irish Health ministry pointed to “strong support from the public for more alcohol labeling.” “The aim is to provide consumers information on alcohol products regardless of the manner of purchase whether in a shop, in a pub or online,” the ministry said. Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar’s government wants labeling that details health risks including each drinks’ calories and possible links to diseases including cancer. The warnings would take up a third of the label. Protectionist MeasureFor a majority of Northern Ireland’s alcohol producers, the Republic of Ireland is a key export market, according to Hospitality Ulster, which represents the industry in the region. The organization said the 40 micro brewers and small craft distillers would be especially vulnerable to the extra costs flowing from Ireland’s proposals. The Northern Ireland drinks industry’s exports to the Republic of Ireland stood at 135 million pounds ($180 million) in 2015, the most recent year for which figures are available. That’s more than a third of the total sales by the sector, which includes soft drinks. Sammy Wilson, a lawmaker with Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party, accused the Irish government of seeking to freeze out competitors to protect local producers. "This is obviously the intention of the regulation and is another example of the underhand tactics used by the Irish government to restrict trade while waving the flag for the European single market,” Wilson told the Belfast Telegraph. For now, exporters are bracing for the likelihood they’ll have to comply with the changes if and when they are imposed. “Labeling is always an issue and we come across this when we step up exports where we have to add more text in to comply,” said Bernard Sloan, who runs the Whitewater Brewery, about 40 miles from the border. “For Republic of Ireland I believe it’s inevitable that we’ll have to do this. It’s ridiculous that individuals jump on a ‘danger to health’ bandwagon to up the ante on labeling.” — With assistance by Peter Flanagan
0 Comments
(Reuters) - Brexit Secretary David Davis is creating a Brexit plan that would give Northern Ireland joint UK and European Union status so it could trade freely with both, as well as a buffer zone to eliminate the need for border checkpoints with Ireland, The Sun newspaper reported on Thursday. Davis is drawing a proposed 10-mile (16-km)-wide trade buffer zone along the border that would be in effect for local traders like dairy farmers after Britain leaves the bloc, the newspaper said. The Brexit ministerâs plan is a revision of the âmax facâ or âmaximum facilitationâ plan, the report said, citing a source. British Prime Minister Theresa May previously pledged to take the UK out of the EU customs union by considering two options. One would be âmax facâ in which the UK and EU would be entirely separate customs areas but would try to use technology to reduce friction and costs at the border. The other option being considered is a âcustoms partnershipâ, according to which the UK would cooperate with the EU more closely and collect tariffs on its behalf with no requirement of declarations of goods crossing the border. The European Union previously criticized May for not setting out how the UK would achieve a frictionless border with the EU without erecting a land border to control goods between the British province of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Britain suggested earlier this month that it would be willing to extend the use of EU tariffs as a backstop if there were delays in ratification of a Brexit deal to avoid a return to a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, adding the government did not want to use that option. Reporting by Kanishka Singh in Bengaluru; Editing by Peter Cooney Barclays is tightening its lending criteria to a UK economy that is lagging behind the rest of the world. Chief executive Jes Staley says Brexit uncertainty was helping to stunt economic growth and that was something the bank could not ignore. Speaking exclusively to the BBC he said "we have to be mindful of weaknesses in the economy and we have protect the integrity of the bank". That meant tightening some lending criteria, "just to be prudent". "In no way do we pull back in a radical fashion - but we will look at our credit exposures and see whether that's proper given the direction of the economy," Mr Staley said. "We can at the margin tighten some of our underwriting criteria and credit standards just to be prudent for the stability of the bank." The UK economy is still growing - but very slowly. In the last 12 months it has grown 1.2% compared with 2.2% in the US and 2.5% in the eurozone. Mr Staley said measures might include looking at how big a loan Barclays would be prepared to provide as a percentage of the value of a residential property - the so called loan to value ratio - particularly in London and the South East. 'New development'He arrived in north east England today with an encouraging message for local business - announcing a new £500m fund for loans to small and medium sized businesses. But his warning on the UK economy, and Barclays' risk appetite, was the more telling content for a bank with over a £1 trillion in UK loans. The government has always accepted that businesses - particularly foreign ones - will be cautious about investing in the UK while Brexit is under discussion. A group of European industrialists told the Prime Minister as much at a meeting yesterday at Number 10 on Wednesday. But the fact that the headwinds are making a UK bank such as Barclays say explicitly that it is becoming concerned about its exposure to the UK economy is a new development. Read again Barclays to tighten lending to Brexit-affected UK economy : https://ift.tt/2xwlfU1When the US today announced steep tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from the EU, Mexico, and Canada, it also offered a warning about Britain’s future in trade negotiations. Donald Trump’s administration announced that it would no longer exempt the EU from 25% duties on steel, and 10% on aluminum. European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker declared today as “a bad day for world trade.” Britain now faces an even greater task in sealing a trade deal with the EU, once it leaves the bloc on March 29, 2019. While the UK will still have a transition period of 21 months after this date to adjust to a new legal and political landscape, it will have to negotiate new trade deals for itself. The UK has set its heart on sealing a deal with the US ever since the nation voted for Brexit. But if Trump is willing to start a trade war with its biggest trading partners Canada and Mexico, as well as the EU, it’s unlikely he’d do any favors for Britain. “US tariffs will serve as another reminder that Trump might have populist sympathies for Brexit, but that his anti-trade course poses questions about his willingness to strike a UK-US trade agreement post Brexit quickly,” says Carsten Nickel, deputy director of research at Teneo Intelligence. After all, the US exports less than 4% of its goods to the UK. Meanwhile, British exports to the US comprise around 15% of the UK’s total exports, according to data from the International Trade Centre. In our age there is no such thing as “keeping out of politics”. All issues are political issues and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia. I wish I’d come up with that. But it was George Orwell, in his 1946 essay Politics And The English Language. One assumes we, by which I mean humanity, make constant progress over time – that things improve. And everywhere you look that’s true, except in the field of politics. Lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia. As true now as it was then. Who could possibly conjure a more accurate characterisation of politics in Britain since the 23 June 2016 referendum? It has been a curiously depressing two years, in which our national shortcomings have far outweighed any positive assumptions about what it means to be British. One of the strangest aspects, to me anyway, is how debate has focused almost exclusively on money. To this day, both sides persist in measuring the value of our relationship with the EU in terms of pounds and pence. And since this is so tough to unpick, because so many factors are woven in to the economy, we’ve ended up in a bottomless spiral of argument about hypotheticals. But one thing that is concrete is the past 70 years of relative security and the consequential prosperity we’ve enjoyed across this continent mainly because of the institutions we put in place after the Second World War. I wrote in the New European soon after the vote about how this generation was in grave danger of taking for granted something our mothers and grandmothers never could: a permanent state of peace between neighbouring nations. That the European Union was not conceived the regulate the curvature of a banana, but to regulate our capacity to kill each other. From the Hague Conference in 1948, to the Treaty of Paris in 1951, to the Treaty of Rome in 1957, to the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, this union of states was founded on clear ideals. These are respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights. Not whether or not we could cut a free trade deal with India. But it is dosh that still dominates everything – from the lies on the bus, to the Brexit bill, from this week’s OECD forecast to HMRC’s estimate of the price of max-fac. The unprecedented security the EU has lent us, from which all our relative prosperity flows, barely gets a look in. Perhaps I’m too worried. Maybe serious rift between our near neighbours is inconceivable. But look at how we get pulled this way or that by American foreign policy, increasingly divergent from EU values. At the malevolent game-playing of Putin, affecting especially our fellow member states in the east. And at the rise of far-right nationalistic politics across Europe, and is it really such a stretch that we might one day find ourselves facing-off against each other? At best, the relegation of the ideals we once thought so central to the very concept of Britishness is deeply troubling. One of the New European front pages I still think very hard about is one we ran during the destruction of Aleppo. We updated a famous Spanish Civil War poster about the carpet bombing of Madrid (which later inspired The Manic Street Preachers), publishing a photograph of a dead child beneath a sky full of Russian bombers, with the headline: "If We Tolerate This, Our Children Will Be Next". Five months later a suicide bomber blew himself up at a concert in Manchester, killing 22 and injuring as many as 800. Half of them children. Today, The Times reported how Britain’s post-Brexit access to a pan-EU database of criminals’ DNA and vehicle registrations is in doubt. That such things are now a negotiating bargaining chip is tragic. And who knew? Who thought of all these complexities when we voted on 23 June 2016? If we are still unravelling Brexit’s complexities, how can anyone say with a straight face that the British public knew what they were voting for on 23 June 2016? If the government still cannot decide what Brexit means, how can they pretend they have a meaningful mandate at all? Here’s the thing, the last great taboo of Brexit, the unsayable. But I’ll say it anyway because it’s true: the British public were not smart enough to understand the consequences of Brexit. This isn’t elitist. Nobody was smart enough. We were all too ignorant, too lied to, too manipulated by media, too encouraged to believe the failings of domestic politics were someone else’s fault, and too hypnotised by abstracts such as “sovereignty” “taking back control”, “red, white and blue Brexit”. Deceits dressed up as patriotism. Ironically, it’s this precise reason why I now believe a second referendum, people’s vote, first referendum on the deal - whatever you want to call it - is the only way to bring this country back together. Now that we’ve all been exposed to the realities of Brexit, we should all be given a chance to vote again. That for the very first time in this long, sorry mess we had the opportunity to see past the mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia of British politics, and truly decide for ourselves. Informed, clear-eyed, snapped free from hypnosis. That’s a result we could all accept and stand beside. Win or lose. Now read: Serious damage has been done thanks to Brexit Why Theresa May has little to lose if she calls a snap election Read again Nobody was smart enough to understand Brexit : https://ift.tt/2LMmthdHow tough is Theresa May? She has a death stare which makes Gordon Brown look, by comparison, like the kind of prime minister who'd be dead-legged by a nine-year-old in a school playground. But is she as tough as she looks? Or is Mrs May merely stubborn? And cautious? And rather indecisive? For a prime minister with a reputation for strength, Theresa May's now spending a surprising amount of time being urged behind closed doors in Downing Street to stand up, and face down, the hard-line Brexiteers in her own party. A stream of Tory MPs have been urging Mrs May to defy the hard-line Brexiteers for the sake of striking compromises to achieve what they're calling a sensible Brexit. Three former Cabinet ministers were the latest through the door. Amber Rudd, Justine Greening and her former deputy Damian Green. Green told me, in an interview for BBC Radio 4's World at One: "There's a danger of assuming that those who shout the loudest represent the most and I think there is a silent majority within the parliamentary party that wants Brexit, that accepts that Brexit is going to happen, but wants it to be a pragmatic and sensible Brexit that means, above all, there's no disruption if we can achieve that." What, then, about the whispered threat among Brexiteers that Mrs May might face a vote of no confidence, if she strays too far from the Brexit straight and narrow? Was he sure she'd win? "Certainly that, but I think even before that, the vast majority of my colleagues, even those who have been very strongly campaigning for Brexit, recognise that this is absolutely not the time to do that sort of thing." So what might a so-called sensible Brexit look like? While Cabinet ministers search for agreement on Britain's future customs relationship with the EU - a search which, I'm hearing, is getting nowhere fast - attention's focussing on getting Brussels to agree to the fall-back plan of extending a customs deal until new trade deals are struck, and ensuring British borders have the staff and high-tech equipment to cope. Meanwhile, at Westminster, there is more talk among Tory MPs than many people suppose about perhaps extending some form of single market relationship at the same time. The former head of Theresa May's Policy Board, ex-minister George Freeman, certainly thinks so. And look closely for a phrase which seems to have become fashionable. "The silent majority of the Conservative parliamentary party want the prime minister, and support the prime minister in negotiating a deal where we have as frictionless and as cost-free access to the European market as we can negotiate, and the freedom to do our own deals with the emerging economies," he told me. "The mood in the parliamentary party is that the balance of probability falls in terms of staying with our existing market, and the burden of proof falls with those emerging trade deals. If we see them and begin to see what they could be worth then the mood shifts. But right now the vast majority of Conservative MPs want to deliver a prosperity Brexit." Maybe so, but getting even broad agreement among MPs would be tough. Getting agreement in Brussels, maybe tougher still. And there's a view among senior Tories that it would take a parliamentary defeat at the hands of Tory rebels and Labour opponents to force Theresa May's hand. Or untie them, depending on your point of view. The Tory rebels' unofficial chief whip in the Commons is Stephen Hammond. Were the rebels who are threatening to vote to stay in the EU Customs Union holding firm? Ready to defeat the Government? The answer was "yes... if forced". "But we're a long way away from that. I am trying to work with the government, as a number of others are, to make sure that we can get what the prime minister wants, which is frictionless trade. We need to start concentrating on the interests of British industry. And therefore if in the short term, we need a longer period in the customs union to sort out our new customs arrangements, that's what the government should do," he said. Committed, convinced, Brexiteers insist enough compromises have already been made. Peter Bone doesn't shout. He's quite softly spoken. But still manages to make himself clear. "There have been lots and lots of compromises by people who believe in Brexit to keep everyone together," he said. "But there are certain things that we've compromised enough on to get agreement and we really can't go any further on those. We shouldn't be listening to people who shout the loudest, we should be talking to everyone and trying to create an agreement that everyone can support. But that has to be based on what the British people voted for." To state the obvious, Brexit's a struggle. With Brussels. In the Tory party. And remember the wrangling in the Labour Party will be every bit as crucial to the outcome - whatever that may be. But just now, the silent majority in the Tory party, if that's what they are, are keen to give a new meaning to the Brexiteer's favourite slogan. The one about "Taking back control". Read again Brexit: Theresa May being urged to 'take back control' : https://ift.tt/2Jmaw3l
Could drones save the UK post-Brexit?
Some of the world's biggest companies in autos, energy and food have urged the United Kingdom to end the confusion over its future trade ties with the European Union.A group representing over 50 major European companies including BP (BP), Vodafone (VOD), Nestle (NSRGF), BMW (BMWYY), and Norsk Hydro (NHYDY) met with Prime Minister Theresa May on Wednesday and warned her that trade between the United Kingdom and European Union must remain "frictionless" after Brexit. "The uninterrupted flow of goods is essential to both the EU and UK economies," the European Round Table of Industrialists said in a statement after the meeting. "We need clarity and certainty, because time is running out." With just 10 months to go until Brexit day (March 29, 2019), May is still struggling to identify -- and negotiate -- a framework for trade with the European Union that is acceptable to her cabinet and EU officials. "Uncertainty causes less investment," the ERT said after the meeting, which was attended by top executives from some of its member companies. The key issues are how to handle the flow of goods after Brexit, and what to do about the Irish border -- the only land frontier between the United Kingdom and the European Union. The ERT said trade must remain as "frictionless as with a customs union." Related: Brexit dream of 'frictionless' trade with EU is dying May has ruled out a future customs union, and is considering two alternatives. One would seek to avoid border checks by having the United Kingdom collect tariffs on behalf of the European Union, an unprecedented arrangement that has been dismissed as unworkable by EU officials. The second would reduce the need for border checks through the use of new technologies that critics say don't yet exist. UK customs officials have estimated that filing the trade declarations required to make the system work would cost businesses up to £20 billion ($27 billion) per year. Negotiators continue to shuttle between Brussels and London, but issues that were identified as stumbling blocks a year ago remain unresolved. The UK parliament has hit the government with a series of defeats on key pieces of legislation related to Brexit. Talks with the European Union are set to resume on Monday. Experts say the chance that Brexit won't happen is very slim, but the lack of progress and ever tighter deadlines are worrying investors and business executives. They fear a "no-deal" exit that would wreak havoc on the United Kingdom's relationship with its biggest export market. In that scenario, supply chains across industry would be disrupted and trade delayed, threatening production lines, shortages and higher prices. In a statement issued following the meeting with business executives, May's office said it was working to ensure that future trade is "as frictionless as possible." "The prime minister recognized the necessity of providing certainty for businesses," the statement said. Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated the number of months to go until Brexit. Read again Big businesses tell UK they need Brexit clarity now : https://ift.tt/2L9kfqU302 Days to GoToday in Brexit: The political crisis in Italy reminds the European establishment why it can’t allow the U.K. to walk away cost-free. There have to be consequences. European Union officials have a new favorite word when discussing Brexit. Chief Brexit negotiatior Michel Barnier referred to “consequences” five times in his speech in Portugal last weekend. He was reflecting the EU’s growing concern that too many of the British government’s positions on relations with the bloc after the divorce look too much like, well, staying in the EU. “The United Kingdom wants to leave,” Barnier said. “That is its decision, not ours. And that has consequences.” He said: “When it comes to the economy, and foreign policy, the best way to influence the decision of the European Union is to be in the European Union.” As Bloomberg reports today, the EU only has to look at the political crisis in Italy to remind its 27 governments why it should stick to its principles in the Brexit talks. The success of two populist parties, the anti-establishment Five Star Movement and the anti-immigrant League, both euroskeptics to varying degrees, might make it even harder for the U.K. to win its Brexit arguments. Now more than any time since the Brexit process began, the EU can’t let leaving look more attractive that staying. Ever since the U.K. referendum in 2016, the EU has denied it wants to “punish” Britain. But the EU is adamant the U.K. can’t have as good a relationship with the 27 remaining countries as it has had while a member. It’s for that reason that negotiators are pouring cold water on British attempts to retain influence over European defense policy and to remain in Europol, the law enforcement agency, as well as on the ambitious system of “mutual recognition” of standards for trade that the U.K. aspires to. This doesn’t sit well with Britain, which wants to establish a relationship of equals. The U.K. sees advantages in continuing to shape rules and to cooperate as if it were still a member on projects where both sides have common interests. The EU, by contrast, doesn’t want the U.K. hanging around like an ex-partner, still trying to throw its weight around. Today’s Must-Reads
Brexit in BriefHistory Lesson | A former U.K. Foreign Office minister and ex-deputy secretary-general of the United Nations said cutting ties with the EU risks a repeat of isolationist mistakes of the past, including Nazi appeasement. Mark Malloch-Brown, a non-affiliated lawmaker who sits in Parliament’s upper House of Lords, raised Neville Chamberlain’s attempt to reach a deal with Adolf Hitler in the 1930s when he was asked why Britain should stay close to the bloc. Red Tape | New M&A rules to be applied in the U.K. from June 11 are likely to raise barriers for non-domestic buyers, according to Bloomberg Intelligence. More red tape and government intervention are in store for transactions involving Britain’s advanced technology and military sectors. Companies in Europe are likely to face regulatory hurdles and lengthier merger reviews after Brexit. Chocolate Teapot | An Irish Senator quipped that “max fac,” a technology-heavy British idea to solve the Irish border issue, is so outlandish it might have been designed by Willy Wonka, the children’s book character. Such a system won’t be ready for “decades” and carries enormous costs, Neale Richmond, who chairs the Irish Senate’s Brexit committee, said at an event in Dublin on Wednesday. Looking Up | British consumers are feeling more upbeat about their spending prospects, though they’re still worried about the economic outlook, according to GfK. An index of confidence increased by 2 points in May to minus 7, the market-research firm said in a report published Thursday, with consumers declaring themselves more optimistic about their personal financial situation. They are still downbeat about the general state of the economy, keeping the index in negative territory. No Access | France is blocking Britain’s attempt to remain part of the EU security system called the Pruem Convention, which helps to identify foreign criminals, according to the Times. The newspaper says the government wanted a guarantee that it can continue to access and share DNA, fingerprint and vehicle information with other European countries after Brexit. Investment Concerns | Europe’s biggest industrial companies warned Prime Minister Theresa May they will not invest in the U.K. as long as there is uncertainty over the terms of Brexit, the Financial Times reports. A delegation of executives from companies including BP, Vodafone, Nestle, BMW and E.ON met with the prime minister and Brexit Secretary David Davis on Wednesday to voice their concerns about what Britain’s departure from the EU will mean for their U.K. operations. Cashing In | The U.K. is considering issuing new series of coins to commemorate Brexit, according to the Sun. Conservative lawmakers have written to Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury Robert Jenrick, who replied saying he is supportive of the idea and can “see the argument”. The newspaper says the plans have now been sent to the official Royal Mint Advisory Committee, with the government’s blessing. Something to add? Missed yesterday’s Bulletin? Like the Brexit Bulletin? Subscribe to Bloomberg All Access and get much, much more. You’ll receive our unmatched global news coverage and two in-depth daily newsletters, The Bloomberg Open and The Bloomberg Close. [unable to retrieve full-text content]
Let's go back in time for a minute. It's June the 24th, 2016, the day after the Brexit referendum. To most pundits' surprise, the UK has narrowly voted to leave the EU. But something strange is happening. The economy isn't falling off a cliff, as some had predicted. There's no imminent, self-inflicted recession. And the Treasury's prediction that 800,000 jobs are about to disappear - its worst-case scenario - also appears overcooked. So what's actually happened to the economy since the vote? And what impact will Brexit really have? No. True, the pound dropped 10% immediately after the result. There's been little recovery against the euro. But the pound has climbed back up to the $1.35 mark. Inflation has risen. So things like bread and chocolate are more expensive for you and me. And the economy is about 1.9% smaller than pro-Brexit economists expected it to be at this point. That's a £38bn annual loss. What about the future? On March 29th, 2019, the day Britain officially leaves the EU, not much will change. The transition deal means the UK will probably stay in the single market and customs union until December the 31st, 2020. Businesses can rest easy, for now, knowing that goods, capital, people, and services will continue to flow freely. What's less certain is what sort of customs arrangement the UK and EU will agree on and what trade deals the UK can strike when it's free to set its own tariffs on goods. Ah, yes, those top secret documents, the ones that show the government's own analysis of how Brexit will affect the economy. So what do they tell us? For a start, they say that almost every sector of the economy in every UK region will be worse off under all likely Brexit scenarios. Depending on how hard the Brexit is, the losses are expected to be large, 2% of national income or £40bn a year if Britain stays a member of the single market and adopts Norway's relationship with the EU, 5% of national income if Britain just has a free trade deal with the EU, or 8% of national income if there's a very hard Brexit and Britain trades with the EU under World Trade Organisation rules. In each case, the government expects tax revenues will be hit, even though less money will be transferred to Brussels. The net losses are expected to be between £20bn and £80bn a year. Both the Bank of England and the Office for Budget Responsibility now think the UK economy won't grow faster than about 1.5% a year. But, of course, all of this economic modelling depends on a lot on things we don't know. Will manufacturers be able to import parts from across the EU without big delays at borders? Can companies hire the EU workers they need? Will there be new regulatory barriers erected? Companies are reluctant to invest heavily in the UK until there's clarity over the outcome of the Brexit talks. Britain's long-term economic relationship with the EU should become clearer in the autumn. Oh, and one more thing. The EU withdrawal bill still has to make its way through Parliament and clear a lot of hurdles before anything is set in stone. Read again The Brexit Files: the hit to the UK economy : https://ift.tt/2kGhTox |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
November 2018
Categories |