Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Inside Business -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) family life, there wouldn't be

cheap roast dinners at the

clubs on Thursdays, beautifully

sums it up. Fantastic. It's

been a great pleasure talking

to you, Dean. I don't think I

can get enough of our Commonwealth brothers. Back to

you, Barrie. Thanks, Mike.

Alan Kohler coming up. I'll

leave you now with this, ABC

News correspondent fmtion has

been to many of the world's

trouble spots but he'll never

forget the day he tried to tell

Julian Assange his fame is fading. Thanks for watching. Are you worried that,

compared to, say, a year ago

when you were riding high and

you were garnering millions of dollars through supporters and

you were the flavour of the

month, now people are deserting

you, you're not seen as the man

you once were? Well, who says

perception from reading the this? Well, this is a general

media. Absolutely not a

general perception. Across the

general population of the world

I have name recognition.

Within Australia personally the

approval rating for Julian

Assange is double the approval

rating for Julia Gillard.

Closed Captions by CSI This Program is Captioned Live.

Hello there, welcome to 'Inside

Business'. As they say in

aviation, adopt the brace position, the flight has got

bumpty. When Qantas chief Alan

Joyce took the extraordinary

decision to ground his entire

fleet late yesterday afternoon,

he unleashed a chain of events

that will not only have massive

implications for the nation's

carrier and aviation in

general, but will probably have

an impact on all businesses.

It's a big test for Fair Work

Australia, which adjourned a hearing on the dispute last

night and is due to reconvene

this afternoon, and a test of

the Labor Government's Fair Work Act as well as for the

Government itself. Given the

importance of air travel for

the economy. As for Qantas,

well, it's now make or break clearly. The brand damage and

the free kick to its

competitors is such that Qantas

is basically must win this dispute comprehensively and

dramatically cut its costs to

survive as a national and

international carrier. Alan

Joyce, the CEO of Qantas, will

program this morning. be our feature guest on the

Without further ado, let's

cross to Alan Joyce in Sydney,

the Qantas CEO. Alan Joyce,

you said yesterday that the

industrial action was killing

Qantas slowly. Have you

decided to kill it quickly

instead? No, Alan. We had to

bring this to a head, because

over the last nine months we've

been in negotiations and not

getting anywhere with these outrageous demands from the

unions. In fact, the

industrial action that was

taking place was causing us

huge damage. We've had 70,000

passengers disrupted, nearly

$70 million in costs to the

airline. Our forward bookings

had collapsed. We were in a

position we were going to be

losing $15 million a week and

we were in a position where the

unions were saying they were

going to slow bake us, quoting

one of the union leaders.

Unfortunately, after the AGM on

Friday the rhetoric got even

worse, with people talking

about 48-hour stoppages, people

talking about further damage to

our customers. So in the long

run we had to stop this, we had

to bring it to a close. The only alternative available to

us under Fair Work Australia

was to lock out the employees

involved in that industrial

action. But the full grounding

that you announced yesterday

and actually implemented

yesterday is a massive loss of

faith with your customers and

with the staff who aren't

involved in the dispute. It's a long way back for you now,

especially with competitors

trying to pick you off. Well,

I have to say, Alan, I completely disagree with that.

I think it's absolutely the

opposite. If we hadn't taken

this action, we would have had another year of

disruptions, we would have had another year of continuous

another year of lost confidence for Qantas, another year of

tens of thousands of passengers

every week being disrupted, we

would have had all of the jobs

of people that weren't taking

these actions at risk. I've

done this to bring certainty to

the customers, to the

employees, and stop this slow

bleeding of Qantas, the slow

roasting of Qantas that these

unions were doing over a year

that would have killed the

airline, killed its brand,

killed its customer loyalty and destroyed the jobs of thousands

of Australians. I say it again,

aren't you really at risk of

killing the airline quickly?

This is such a dramatic impact

on your brand and your market

share. This is really a

turning point for Qantas, isn't

it? I actually think it will

be a positive turning point,

because we get this out of the

way. The support I've been

getting, Alan, from business

leaders who are our biggest customers across the country

that have huge contracts with

Qantas and I apologise to all

of our customers for the

disruption it's causing, and

the business leaders are saying

you needed to do this, you needed to bring certainty back

to the schedule, you're in

danger of losing our business

unless you do something.

That's small businesses

contacting me, sending me

emails. I've been overwhelmed

with the support we're getting

for the action we've done.

People saw this was not

sustainable for the airline,

that we couldn't give in to

these union demands, that we

had to do something. I keep on

saying this was the only

alternative we had under Fair

Work Australia. The status quo would have been the death of

Qantas. This brings it to a

head, allows us to get back

certainty to our operation,

allows us to give certainty to our customers and to our

employees. That has to be the

important thing for all of

those stakeholders. Are you

saying, in effect, that if you

don't win this dispute and get

your way with the unions,

Virgin or Jetstar will have to become Australia's national

flag carrier, because it can't

be Qantas? I've said for soom

time, Alan, and other

commentators like Dick Smith

and other commentators out

there say Qantas has no right

for existence, Qantas has to be

flexible and add pt a to

survive in the future. We've

been around for 90 years

adapted different because we have changed, we've

circumstances. We've been

talking in the past that with

this big challenge with an international business it's

losing $200 million a year and

it's getting worse. We have to

turn it around. We have a plan

to do that in the next three to

five years. That plan needs to

be implemented. It can't be

blocked by union demands

because if it does, it risks the entire future of the

organisation going forward.

That future is not guaranteed,

so we have amazing brands like

Pan Am, TWA, Ansett, that

disappeared because they didn't

adapt. Qantas needs to

adapt. You are saying in effect

really that Virgin can be

Australia's national flag

carrier if you can't achieve

the changes you want? No, I'm

not saying that, Alan. I'm

saying that the changes that we

are doing will ensure that

Qantas is the national flag

carrier forever, because I

believe that this amazing

airline is one of the strongest

airlines in the world. It's

the only investment-grade

airline in the world. We have

a strong position. But over

time that positive would weaken

and the airline would be in a

no-win situation. We're a lot

stronger than Virgin today in

terms of profitability, we're a

lot stronger than Virgin today

in the domestic market. Not in international operations

obviously. No, in international we somewhere a

problem. Jetstar is a lot

stronger than Virgin, frequent

flyers is making money, the freight business is making

money. We have to turn around

the under performing part of

the business. If we don't, it

risks the rest of the business.

I'm committed to the plan we

have. I know I can turn it around. People were saying this about the domestic

business. As you know, ten

years ago, when the low-cost

carriers came in, people were

saying Qantas would disappear,

the low-cost carriers would

take over, Virgin would be the

biggest carrier operating

domestically. We were bold

then, we created Jetstar. I

was the founding CEO of

Jetstar. Now seven years later

Qantas is the most profitable

carrier flying domestically,

made $400 million in EBIT last

year. We're growing it, we're

employing more people. Jetstar

was the second most profitable carrier. We were bold back

then, we changed our business

and we allowed our business to

compete with a changing

environment. That's what we

need to do internationally. Alternatively,

what are you promising if you

do get your way? Virgin has

actually signed EBAs with the

unions that you're in dispute

with that does give them the

sort of flexibility you're requiring. What it's offered in return for that is job

guarantees. All you're guarantees. All you're saying

is that you might be able to

keep going, but are you

prepared to provide the sorts

of guarantees that Virgin has

provided? Alan, I'm not sure

what you mean by the what you mean by the job guarantees Virgin has provided.

Most of your viewers today,

most people that run business

know the best way to secure

people's jobs is to have a

viable, successful business.

There's nobody in life today in

any business around the world

that has a job guarantee. You

can't have it. You have that guarantee

guarantee when you make sure

your business is viable and

profitable and can survive. We

all know that. The way I want

to give everybody that job

security is to have a strong, viable Qantas, and that's what

our plan is all about. When we

achieve that, people will have

the job security that they

need. We can't put it into a

contract, because that contract

doesn't guarantee it. I'm sure

everybody that worked for anset

10 years ago never would have

thought they had job security,

because it was a non-viable business. That's what happened

to that business. We have to

make sure it doesn't happen to

Qantas. Could it happen to

Qantas in time? As I said,

Qantas is not guaranteed its

existence, we have to change to

adopt. The easiest thing for

CEO of company would have been

to give in to union demands,

kick the can down the street. Qantas wouldn't have a problem

in the next few years. That would have been the wrong thing

to do. I'm very passionate

about this company, very passionate about its brand,

very passionate about what it's

contributed over 90 years. I've taken these tough decisions because I believe

it's the right thing to do, it's the right thing it's the right thing for

Qantas, its customers, its

employees and if we turn this

business around, it will be

guaranteed to be around for the

next 90 years. That's what we

need to focus on. Your pay,

your salary, has become a key

issue in all this. According

to the annual report, approved

at the AGM the other day, was

that your salary was $5

million, up 71% over the

previous year. I know that

only $2 million of that was cash, the rest was deferred

shares and everything, but

still surely that wasn't a

great thing to do in the middle

of this dispute? Well, I have

to say, Alan, again James Strong, chairman of the remun

rakss committee, explained this

extensively at the AGM and said

that was not the number. For

various accountancy treatments

which everybody needs to be

changed in the disclosure, the

number was a lot less than

that. If you look at the

annual reports, Alan, you'll

see that in 2009 I took a 30%

salary cut. In 2010 there was

20%. What I got paid last year was less than the year before.

In fact, what I get paid today

is less than when I was CEO of

Jetstar over four years ago.

I'm not the highest paid

employee in the company.

Captains are getting paid more

by error. You point out at the

AGM the owners of this company

understood all of that. The

shareholders understood all of

that. 96% voted in favour of

the report. That was

overwhelming support from shareholders for the renum overwhelming support from the

ration, because they know that

management has been disciplined

and has not been outrageous in

terms of the salary and payments. There isn't overwhelming support from the

staff for your salary, that's

for sure. But, Alan, the fact

is that it's a lot of

misinformation on this. As I

said, 30% decline in 09, 20% in

10, and a decline last year.

We have taken a decrease over

that period of time and still get less than Jetstar's

CEO. I've read the REM report.

hadn't What it says is that if it

hadn't been paid in shares,

which is the cause of you

getting 71% increase this year,

what would have happened is it

would have been smoothed over

the previous few years, so you

wouldn't have got those decreases in previous years,

but you wouldn't have got such

an increase this year. That's

what it says. But, Alan, the

share price is varied. You

know that my remuneration, a

large element is linked to the

share price. The share price

has varied a lot over that

period of time. That's the

right thing to do. That's why

the shareholders overwhelmingly

were in favour of this. After

all, they are the owners of the company. They should be

judging what the management and

what the board gets paid. The

Government legislation has

process if the shareholders do

not support this two years in a

row, as you know, there's a

spill of the board. Qantas was

one of the companies that had a

solid vote for the remuneration package. 96%

package. 96% was overwhelming

support for this. But you must

accept that there's an element that

that looks like there's an

element of "up yours" about

this, "do as I say, not as I

do" As I said, Alan, we've

taken cuts over the years and

the management levels have been

cut at the organisation by over

20% this year alone. We have

been cutting back on the management costs.

management costs. We have pay

freezes for management, bonuses

weren't paid during the GFC.

For the shareholders to have

proved this and the proxy

voters, the proxy advisers that

look at it, to say that this

was appropriate shows that the

people that review this in

detail believe this was not inappropriate. We are doing the right thing by the

the right thing by the salary

increases for employees as well

and in a lot of cases we have

done good deals for a lot of

the employees over the last

year. 2 million of your pay,

which is the short-term

incentive plan, is deferred I

think until February 2012. Is

that in effect - does that money depend or that award,

that bonus, depend on you

winning the fight that you're

in now, that in effect it is your reward

your reward for winning the

battle? Alan, that's

absolutely not the case. What

that is about is performance of

Qantas compared to a basket of

other companies like the other

airlines and like ASX and 50

companies and it's related to

the relative performance of

Qantas and its links to returns

It's nothing to do with we give to our shareholders.

anything of this. The easiest

thing for me to do, again it

comes back to this, is to

resolve would have been to give

in to the union demands, that

would have been in the short

term the best thing to do. It

would not have been in the long-term interests of the

company. It would have been a

disaster for the company and

all the people employed in this company. I asked that question

because the remuneration report

says the awards will be linked

to the Qantas share price up to

the date of investing, with

their value being exposed to

share price risk through the

period that the builder a

stronger Qantas initiatives are

being launched. Obviously the

flekszability you're seeking to

achieve with the unions is a

core part of the building a stronger Qantas initiative,

isn't it? Well, no. I have to say getting the company to

perform is where that's linked

to. What we're after is a lot

of these initiatives are

dependent on us getting

successfully Jetstar Japan off

the ground, getting

successfully the ventures that

we have and the growth we have

and turning around the

international business. If we

do that, that's not only giving

customers what they need, it

gives the employees what they

need and it gives the

shareholders what they need.

That's a win for everybody.

That focus of the company is

the right focus, because if

everybody wins out of that,

that means that we have done a

good job and that's what we're

focusing in on. The other thing

is you must have known for a

while that you were going to do

this grounding and lockout.

There's no way that you can pull off an international

grounding of the entire fleet

in 24 hours. Well, that's not

true, Alan, because, again, to

be very clear, we were in negotiations with the unions,

we'd had over 200 meetings,

we'd made a decision to get to

the AGM, see Lee Clifford at

the AGM talked about that being

a watershed moment. We knew if

we got overwhelming support

from the shareholders, we were

waiting to see what the union

reaction would be. The reaction would be. The union

reaction we believed, because

they'd been around saying that

they believed that the boards,

the management, would be rolled

at the AGM. We had 96%, 97%

support and an overwhelming endorsement of the management

of the board by the

shareholders. Then we looked

at the rhetoric from the

unions. The unions' rhetoric was "this is going to get

worse, it's going to last longer, we're going to take

more stoppages qutionz ", so on

Saturday we called a board

meeting. At the board meeting

we discussed where we stood. I

told the board my decision to

ground the airline. It was

fully endorsed by them. I have

to say, Alan, we have to plan

continuously for disruptions.

We had to ground the A380s with

essentially one hour's notice.

We had to ground the aircraft

due to the volcanic ash with no

notice because of the volcanic

ash that was there. The

airline has the ability to act

very fast, because it practices

it, it uses it for activity

that's outside of our control,

and that's what airlines do. You're seeking a

termination ruling from the

Fair Work Australia, as opposed

to a suspension, because I

presume the termination -

you're saying that the termination will apply to both

sides, you'll have to terminate

your lockout, but the unions

will have to terminate their

dispute. But that won't be the

end of it, will it, it will go

on and on, you'll still have

to, in the end, deal with the

unions? Alan, we have applied

States applied for a termination, so have the

States applied for it. The

Government have said that's

their preference, termination

is what all of those parties

want. What that does, to be

clear, it takes us through 21

days of ability to negotiate

with the unions I think on a

fair and balanced basis and

then, at the end of the 21

days, it goes into binding

arbitration. Nobody wants to

go into binding arbitration,

but either way it's over once

that happens because we know

there's certainty to it. So

this will not go on. It only

goes on if there's a

suspension. That's the only

element that gives us

uncertainty going forward. So

is it fair to say that you've

actually brought on the

grounding and the lockout in

order to bring in the

Government to apply for the

termination that then brings

the 21 days s that the process

that you've undertook? No,

that's absolutely not the

process. The process that

we've taken is that up until

now there's been huge damage

caused to our customers, huge

damage caused to the company,

and we felt that the only way

of actually bringing this to a

close for us to take our own

action to ensure that the

unions sat down. That was our

plan. We knew by taking this

plan, which is the only action

we have under Fair Work

Australia, we'd have the unions

sitting down with the company

and then they were having equal

we could negotiate a pain, as the company was, and

settlement. Up until now the

pain is all on the company's

side. The Government decided

to intervene on that and the

process we're going through now

is a determination of a

termination or suspension. We're obviously making our views known in that process. So

you're saying that the only

course of action that you had

to bring about compulsory

arbitration eventual ly was to

throw all your customers into complete disarray around the

world, that's what you had to

do, you're saying that? No,

Alan, I'm saying that the only

option I had was not to have my

option I had was not to have my

customers in disarray all

around the world for the next

one year, with 10,000 customers

disrupted last Friday, that

would happen every week from now now on for another year.

That's what the unions were

saying. There was no way to

bring this to a close unless we

brought it to a head. So for

our customers again I say - I

apologise today for the

disruptions that we've caused,

but this will cause less

disruption to our customers in

the long run that a continued

strike by these unions over the

next year, which was their plan. So as you sit here now

this morning, do you believe

that the lockout will go ahead

tonight, or not? Well, we're

hopeful that we'll have a

determination from Fair Work

Australia today. That's out of

our control. Dependent on that determination, we may then be

able to put an application in

to within six hours we can get

the fleet flying again after

CASA have approved it. We have

to wait and see what that

process generates today and

we're all going to be waiting

to see what happens in Fair Work Australia. Thanks very much for joining us, Alan

Joyce. Thanks, Alan. The Federal Government's

intervention in Qantas was

pretty swift, immediately

invoking the emergency powers

of the Fair Work Act and

dragging all the parties into a

hastily arranged session of

arbitration that didn't start

until about 10 last night.

Having set the rules of engagement, the battle will be

rejoined this afternoon, as

we've just been discussing with

Alan Joyce. One observer who has been following this brawl

attantas pretty closely is

Professor Greg Bamber from the faculty of business

faculty of business and

management at Monash

university, also the author of

"up in the air", a study of airlines around the world

battling the economic and

industrial relations forces

currently buffeting the

aviation industry. Professor

Bamber joins me in the studio

now. Professor Bamber, have

you ever seen anything like

this before, looking at airline industries, in fact any

industries, a full lockout, grounding, like this?

grounding, like this? Well,

there was an episode in the

late 1980s where there was a

dispute between the pilots and

the domestic carriers here,

Australian airlines and Ansett.

Those airlines did lock out the

pilots at that stage and

grounded the fleet and it was

grounded for months and months

and Government intervened. So

in some ways that would be a

precedent to this current precedent to this current incident. Obviously that's

under entirely different laws

in those days. How does Fair

Work Australia Act, the Fair

Work Act, apply now? The

unions have 72 hours notice to

provide before they go on

strike, but it looks like the

companies can give less notice

before they go on strike.

Well, that's right, but the

company is arguing that it was

responding to the protected

industrial action that the unions unions were taking and that's

why it took this immediate why it took this immediate and

very drastic action of grounding its whole fleet

worldwide, which I would have

thought wasn't the only option

, Alan Joyce said he had no alternative. What other option

did he have? He could have

asked Government to intervene,

which Government says it didn't

receive that call. He could

have given notice of such grounding of the fleet. At the have given notice of such a

moment we've got passengers

around the world who are lying

in airports with nowhere to

stay, nowhere to go, massive

disruption to the whole

network, which is going to do network, which is going to do a

huge amount of damage to the

Qantas brand and reputation. He's talked about

the difference between

termination and suspension.

Can you just briefly explain

what that difference is under

the Fair Work Act? Well,

suspension is to provide a

cooling off period and that can

happen when the parties argue

or the Government has argued

that there's been significant

economic damage or the company

is arguing that there is a

safety consideration. So it's

had to ground the fleet because

of safety considerations.

Qantas is arguing now for Qantas is arguing now for a termination of industrial

action by both sides,

presumably. The unions are

wanting a suspension for a

limited period, which would

allow them to recommence the

protected industrial action if

the talks fail. You've been

looking at airlines arnd the

world and how they've been

reforming themselves. Have any

of them done it this way?

British Airways, which is a

similar legacy airline, about

the same age as Qantas, had a

industrial dispute with its very long and damaging

flight attendants over the

period of the last couple of

years. It's now come out of

that and is trying to rebuild a

relationship with its work

force. So that's a bit of a

parallel. Another example that

we look at in our book is south West Airlines in the United West Airlines in the United

States, which is a younger

airline, it's 40 years old, and

it's developed a very close

partnership with its work force

and the unions that represent

its work force. So they've had

differences between them, but they've tried to work through

these issues in a very

constructive way as partners.

That's what I would encourage

the parties in this dispute to

do, not to waste this crisis

but to come out of this crisis

and form a much better working

relationship going forward into

the future. It's a long way to

go to have a constructive

partnership now, you would have

thought? It is a long way to

go, but sometimes a crisis will

help to unfreeze entrenched

positions. This is a service

sector industry. As you know

from flying we have very close contact with the people who

work in the airline. It's very

different from the mining

industry. I see the chairman

of the board of this company

came out of the mining

industry. Lee Clifford of Rio

Tinto, who reformed the mining

industry. There were huge

blues in the mining industry,

huge industrial disputes in the

Pilbara and elsewhere. But

this is a service sector

industry. You can't operate it

in the same way that you can in

a mining industry in remote communities. Similar to the

waterfront dispute of 1998,

which, as you say, is also not

a consumer brand in a way, it's

in the background. Well,

that's right. That's why my

view is look at the experience

of South West, which has grown

to become the largest domestic

airline in the United States.

It's not had any retrenchments

or redundancies, it's been

profitable every year since its

foundation. It's been a foundation. It's been a huge

success story. There are

lessons that can be learned by Qantas and the unions here in Qantas and the unions here in

how to proceed. I appreciate

you coming in at short notice,

your wise words. Thank you, Greg. Thanks very much for

Alan. Due to the extraordinary

events of last night, we've had

to hold over our regular

features. We have time to

briefly check out the other big

story of the week, the reaction

to the EU rescue package. With latest news from Walst and

markets over to Jayne Edwards. markets over to Jayne Edwards.

Investors around the world

seemed to run out of puff ob

Friday after Thursday's

exuberance on global

markets. On Wall Street the

realisation sunk in there was

plenty of hard work ahead:

Thursday saw massive rallies

after Eurozone leaders finally

reached an agreement to manage

a 50% cut in Greek bonds, recapitalise banks recapitalise banks and

quadruple the size of yourop's

bailout fund. Even as the head

of the economic stability of the economic stability fund

was in China lobbies for investment, there was a fresh

round of anti-austerity

demonstrations in Greece and

Spain's jobless rate hit over

attention to next week's attention 21%. Investors are now turning

meetings of the G20, US Federal

Reserve and European central

bank, with hopes high for a cut in Euro interest rates. in Euro interest rates.

Looking at weekly

the US is on track to record

its best month since 1974 and

the other share markets also

piled on between 4 and 5%.

Now, with local news, here's Marcus. Well, a great week this

week, the market's now up 15%

in about 19 days, the market

terrible relieved that only 50%

of Greek bonds are completely

worthless. On the back of worthless. On the back of

that, money shot back into all

of the risk assets, including

the Aussie dollar, which is 14%

plus off its lows now. We saw

a CPI number this week which

was a bit better than expected,

that's fed hopes of a rate cup

on Cup day. That helped the

retail sector, most majors with

a good jump this week. But

star of the sector was

Billabong on the back of their

AGM. They confirmed earnings

guidance and told us guidance and told us

first-quarter sales were up

25%. Woolworths had rather

unimpressive first-quarter

sales numbers, although the

good news for them was their note issue this week was

something like five times

overdescribed. Harvey Norman flagged this week they went

sectors going up is the exdividend. One of the other

resources sector, that's 16% of its lows on the back of the copper

copper price, 18%, and oil

price 23% off their lows. Most

majors are up but star of that

sector was Fortescue Metals,

they had a big jump. They'd

been sold off recently on the

back of fears for a capital

raising, which they duly had a

well-supported $1.5 billion

bond issue. The bank sector is

also performing, they're up 16%

from their lows, helped this

week by the NAB. Final results week by the NAB. Final results

were solid and bode well for

ANZ and Westpac rates coming up. We also saw Macquarie's

interim results, down 34%. The

NAB goes exdividend on 10

November. In other results

news, Resmed fell over on their

results and Leightons and AMP

had updates quite well received

by the market. We saw by the market. We saw AGMs

from Origin, Worley parsons,

Toll, IAG, Newcrest, Qantas,

all went up on their AGMs. One

stock going down on AGM was

Pacific Brands. Win of the

year was Farm Access, up 39%,

and loser of the week was

Mesoblast, downgraded by broker. That's it for the Mesoblast, downgraded by a

program. I've been surrounded

by sporting types getting ready

for 'Offsiders'. If you'd like

to check out interviews with

Alan Joyce or Greg Bamber

again, we're putting the

transcripts and video in a

vodcast on the website a bit

later on. Thanks for your

company. See you next

week. Thanks, Alan. This

morning we're going to devote

'Offsiders' almost entirely to

the Melbourne Cup, the race

that, like Qantas, stops the

nation. We'll try to find the

winner. Yet another strong

chance emerged yesterday in the Lexus, unusually an

Australian-trained prospect.

Green Moon turns in front,

knee Watt made a lightening