1
00:00:05,160 --> 00:00:08,200
Speaker 1: From The Australian. Here's what's on the front. I'm Claire Harvey.

2
00:00:08,280 --> 00:00:16,600
Speaker 1: It's Tuesday, November twelve. Ancient Indigenous rockert could be painted

3
00:00:16,640 --> 00:00:20,480
Speaker 1: over to make it more visible. That's the startling proposal

4
00:00:20,560 --> 00:00:24,320
Speaker 1: from some First Nations leaders at a Victorian rock climbing

5
00:00:24,360 --> 00:00:29,200
Speaker 1: site that's become a battleground over tourism versus cultural heritage.

6
00:00:32,200 --> 00:00:35,639
Speaker 1: Australia's plans for a one billion dollar giant supercomputer are

7
00:00:35,640 --> 00:00:39,880
Speaker 1: in doubt as Queensland's new government announces it's reviewing whether

8
00:00:39,920 --> 00:00:43,519
Speaker 1: it still wants to go ahead. Those stories alive at

9
00:00:43,520 --> 00:00:49,640
Speaker 1: the Australian dot Com dot a U right now. The

10
00:00:49,640 --> 00:00:53,639
Speaker 1: most important court cases are full of juicy details and

11
00:00:53,920 --> 00:00:57,600
Speaker 1: some of it shouldn't be in the public domain. That's

12
00:00:57,680 --> 00:01:01,639
Speaker 1: the take from Federal Court Chief Justice Debruh Mortimer, and

13
00:01:01,680 --> 00:01:04,839
Speaker 1: it's put her at odds with her own courts superstar

14
00:01:05,000 --> 00:01:10,039
Speaker 1: Judge Michael Lee today. How much are we allowed to know?

15
00:01:23,240 --> 00:01:25,840
Speaker 1: In a newsroom? There's an exciting part of the day

16
00:01:25,959 --> 00:01:29,000
Speaker 1: when the court reporters come back from the cathedrals of

17
00:01:29,160 --> 00:01:32,800
Speaker 1: justice to tell us what's been going on. At The Australian,

18
00:01:32,880 --> 00:01:38,560
Speaker 1: our Legal affairs correspondent is Ellie Dudley. Ellie, there's been

19
00:01:38,600 --> 00:01:40,920
Speaker 1: an amazing case going through the federal court of a

20
00:01:41,560 --> 00:01:45,560
Speaker 1: Channel seven Spotlight employee taking legal action against the network.

21
00:01:45,560 --> 00:01:46,320
Speaker 1: Tell me all about it.

22
00:01:46,520 --> 00:01:48,280
Speaker 2: Yeah, so let me tell you, Claire, this has been

23
00:01:48,280 --> 00:01:51,240
Speaker 2: an incredible case. It's all about Emilia saw who's a

24
00:01:51,280 --> 00:01:53,360
Speaker 2: former employee at seven Spotlight.

25
00:01:53,640 --> 00:01:58,760
Speaker 1: She is suing the network. Oh sorry, we can't bring

26
00:01:58,800 --> 00:02:02,600
Speaker 1: you the juice on this. And Ellie, the big corporate

27
00:02:02,600 --> 00:02:05,160
Speaker 1: scandal that's going on right now is Super Retail, this

28
00:02:05,240 --> 00:02:08,359
Speaker 1: company that has run into trouble with several employees. Tell

29
00:02:08,400 --> 00:02:09,960
Speaker 1: me what's going on there in the federal court.

30
00:02:09,840 --> 00:02:12,560
Speaker 2: So that's an incredible case. You've got Super Retail, which

31
00:02:12,639 --> 00:02:16,160
Speaker 2: is just this mammoth retail behemoth, and these allegations of

32
00:02:16,200 --> 00:02:17,680
Speaker 2: sexual harassment that have come out.

33
00:02:18,280 --> 00:02:22,760
Speaker 1: Oops, can't share that either. So Ellie, those are two

34
00:02:22,760 --> 00:02:25,400
Speaker 1: cases that we would absolutely love to be talking about

35
00:02:25,400 --> 00:02:27,560
Speaker 1: on the front today, but we can't. Why not?

36
00:02:28,360 --> 00:02:31,080
Speaker 2: So in the federal court, Claire, there is this debate

37
00:02:31,160 --> 00:02:34,360
Speaker 2: that appears to be going on about open justice and

38
00:02:34,480 --> 00:02:37,080
Speaker 2: suppression orders, an order that comes from the court to

39
00:02:37,120 --> 00:02:40,639
Speaker 2: suppress either key details or the names of witnesses or

40
00:02:40,639 --> 00:02:44,400
Speaker 2: the names of parties or documents to prevent it from

41
00:02:44,480 --> 00:02:47,120
Speaker 2: being published by the media and being spread more widely.

42
00:02:48,440 --> 00:02:51,760
Speaker 1: If there's anything more interesting than a gritty court case,

43
00:02:52,040 --> 00:02:56,320
Speaker 1: it's senior judges engaging in a very public difference of opinion.

44
00:02:56,720 --> 00:02:59,200
Speaker 1: And that's what's happening in the Federal Court of Australia,

45
00:02:59,480 --> 00:03:03,600
Speaker 1: where the court's superstar Judge Michael Lee and its boss,

46
00:03:03,760 --> 00:03:07,880
Speaker 1: Chief Justice Deborah Mortimer are at odds about how much

47
00:03:08,080 --> 00:03:15,360
Speaker 1: you get to hear about what's going on. There's a

48
00:03:15,440 --> 00:03:18,400
Speaker 1: general principle in court reporting that you could wander into

49
00:03:18,440 --> 00:03:20,920
Speaker 1: pretty much any court in the country, sit down at

50
00:03:20,919 --> 00:03:24,240
Speaker 1: the back as a reporter and start taking notes about

51
00:03:24,240 --> 00:03:28,680
Speaker 1: what's happening. Given that this is taking place on funded premises,

52
00:03:28,840 --> 00:03:32,359
Speaker 1: with judges and sometimes counsel who are being funded by

53
00:03:32,400 --> 00:03:35,520
Speaker 1: the taxpayer, that's not always the case anymore, is it.

54
00:03:36,120 --> 00:03:38,160
Speaker 2: This is what the judges in the Federal Court appear

55
00:03:38,240 --> 00:03:40,960
Speaker 2: to be grappling with at the moment, the Chief Justice

56
00:03:41,000 --> 00:03:43,680
Speaker 2: of the Federal Court saying that open justice is not

57
00:03:43,880 --> 00:03:47,360
Speaker 2: open slather. Open justice does not mean that every juicy

58
00:03:47,480 --> 00:03:50,080
Speaker 2: detail should be available to the media and available to

59
00:03:50,120 --> 00:03:50,520
Speaker 2: the public.

60
00:03:50,560 --> 00:03:56,040
Speaker 1: More broadly, ell least breaking a story today about a

61
00:03:56,080 --> 00:03:59,320
Speaker 1: speech given by Deborah Mortimer, the Chief Justice, in which

62
00:03:59,440 --> 00:04:03,680
Speaker 1: she said, basically, back off. We've used a voice actor

63
00:04:03,840 --> 00:04:05,000
Speaker 1: to bring you justice.

64
00:04:05,160 --> 00:04:12,240
Speaker 3: Mortimer's words, media and community aspirations to obtain all the

65
00:04:12,360 --> 00:04:17,080
Speaker 3: juicy details have never operated as some kind of open

66
00:04:17,200 --> 00:04:23,159
Speaker 3: slaver on disclosure of information in court proceedings. Most of

67
00:04:23,240 --> 00:04:26,480
Speaker 3: us who speak or write about the concept of open

68
00:04:26,720 --> 00:04:31,479
Speaker 3: justice are either official participants in the justice system or

69
00:04:31,560 --> 00:04:36,120
Speaker 3: observers of it. Thus, it is not our story of

70
00:04:36,240 --> 00:04:41,880
Speaker 3: intimate physical violations, or our precarious mental health, or our

71
00:04:42,160 --> 00:04:47,040
Speaker 3: gambling addiction which has led to our bankruptcy, nor our

72
00:04:47,160 --> 00:04:51,040
Speaker 3: contractual arrangements designed to save our business which are at stake.

73
00:04:52,040 --> 00:04:53,719
Speaker 3: We have no skin in the game.

74
00:04:55,480 --> 00:04:59,440
Speaker 1: Mortimer said Judges and journalists should remember the law operates

75
00:04:59,520 --> 00:05:02,200
Speaker 1: on the line lives of human beings, and that every

76
00:05:02,240 --> 00:05:05,760
Speaker 1: time there's a juicy morsel of information, there's also a

77
00:05:05,839 --> 00:05:11,840
Speaker 1: human being who might be personally affected. So let's go

78
00:05:11,920 --> 00:05:14,640
Speaker 1: back to the genesis of this story. Why is Chief

79
00:05:14,960 --> 00:05:16,839
Speaker 1: Justice Dibram Mortemar talking about this.

80
00:05:17,520 --> 00:05:20,080
Speaker 2: We've been talking about open justice for decades and what

81
00:05:20,120 --> 00:05:22,880
Speaker 2: open justice means. Does it mean that someone is just

82
00:05:22,920 --> 00:05:25,000
Speaker 2: able to walk into a courtroom, sit up the back

83
00:05:25,040 --> 00:05:27,719
Speaker 2: and watch what's happening. Or does it mean that, especially

84
00:05:27,720 --> 00:05:29,760
Speaker 2: now in a digital age, that a reporter or a

85
00:05:29,800 --> 00:05:32,240
Speaker 2: member of the public should be able to access every

86
00:05:32,279 --> 00:05:33,000
Speaker 2: detail that's.

87
00:05:32,880 --> 00:05:33,839
Speaker 1: Included in a case.

88
00:05:34,440 --> 00:05:36,320
Speaker 2: The reason that it's so interesting to me as a

89
00:05:36,360 --> 00:05:39,240
Speaker 2: legal affairs reporter is that it appears that the judges

90
00:05:39,279 --> 00:05:42,440
Speaker 2: of the Federal Court have differing views on what open

91
00:05:42,600 --> 00:05:45,719
Speaker 2: justice is. We've got Justice Michael Lee, who our listeners

92
00:05:45,720 --> 00:05:48,120
Speaker 2: would be familiar with as the judge who presided over

93
00:05:48,279 --> 00:05:50,880
Speaker 2: the Bruce Lherman defamation case against Network ten.

94
00:05:51,760 --> 00:05:54,679
Speaker 1: Having escaped the lines dead, mister Lhermitt made the mistake

95
00:05:54,720 --> 00:05:56,120
Speaker 1: of coming back for his head.

96
00:05:57,200 --> 00:06:01,120
Speaker 2: He also presided over Heston Russell's defamation case against the ABC.

97
00:06:01,920 --> 00:06:05,239
Speaker 1: There is not some sliding scale which means the greater

98
00:06:05,320 --> 00:06:07,480
Speaker 1: the public interest in the matter, the greater the margin

99
00:06:07,560 --> 00:06:08,839
Speaker 1: for error in what is published.

100
00:06:09,240 --> 00:06:12,720
Speaker 4: Justice Michael Lee said he has no doubt investigative journalist

101
00:06:12,760 --> 00:06:16,240
Speaker 4: Mark Willersey believed the publication of the stories was in

102
00:06:16,279 --> 00:06:19,640
Speaker 4: the public interest, but that the belief was not reasonable

103
00:06:19,720 --> 00:06:23,560
Speaker 4: in the circumstances. He's awarded mister Russell three hundred and

104
00:06:23,640 --> 00:06:27,680
Speaker 4: ninety thousand dollars in damages, having previously ruled the stories

105
00:06:27,720 --> 00:06:30,000
Speaker 4: conveyed defamatory imputations.

106
00:06:30,760 --> 00:06:33,279
Speaker 2: He thinks that if a suppression order, if there's an

107
00:06:33,320 --> 00:06:36,400
Speaker 2: application for a suppression order, the media should come in

108
00:06:36,640 --> 00:06:39,240
Speaker 2: and fight it and fight for the details to be

109
00:06:39,279 --> 00:06:39,960
Speaker 2: made public.

110
00:06:40,960 --> 00:06:43,679
Speaker 1: In August, Justice Lee said at a women in Media

111
00:06:43,760 --> 00:06:47,040
Speaker 1: conference that he was tired of corporations and other litigants

112
00:06:47,080 --> 00:06:51,320
Speaker 1: who come to court asking for swinging confidentiality or suppression

113
00:06:51,400 --> 00:06:55,400
Speaker 1: orders to prevent the publication of evidence. Justice Lee said

114
00:06:55,440 --> 00:06:58,159
Speaker 1: one way the media could do better is ensuring that

115
00:06:58,279 --> 00:07:00,840
Speaker 1: courts and judges are held to account out when it

116
00:07:00,839 --> 00:07:05,880
Speaker 1: comes to suppression orders. He urged media organizations to engage barristers,

117
00:07:06,360 --> 00:07:09,760
Speaker 1: and he acknowledged that can be expensive. He said, don't

118
00:07:09,760 --> 00:07:13,840
Speaker 1: waste money on top silks, just use comparatively cheap junior

119
00:07:13,880 --> 00:07:18,520
Speaker 1: barristers to argue against suppressions. Lee said part of the

120
00:07:18,560 --> 00:07:21,800
Speaker 1: problem was that often both parties to a case agreed

121
00:07:21,840 --> 00:07:25,200
Speaker 1: to a suppression, the lawyers for the plaintiff and the defendant.

122
00:07:25,640 --> 00:07:30,400
Speaker 1: That means it's up to media organizations to fight. Listeners

123
00:07:30,400 --> 00:07:33,520
Speaker 1: to the front would know that. During the matter of

124
00:07:33,600 --> 00:07:37,120
Speaker 1: Bruce Laman versus Network ten and Lisa Wilkinson. There was

125
00:07:37,160 --> 00:07:40,400
Speaker 1: a YouTube live stream every single day. The vast majority

126
00:07:40,440 --> 00:07:42,600
Speaker 1: of those proceedings were live stream. There were a couple

127
00:07:42,600 --> 00:07:44,760
Speaker 1: of moments when the court was closed and all the

128
00:07:44,800 --> 00:07:47,480
Speaker 1: reporters had to gallop down there too to report on

129
00:07:47,480 --> 00:07:49,920
Speaker 1: what was going on. Tell me about that instance when

130
00:07:49,920 --> 00:07:51,560
Speaker 1: the court was closed. What it was.

131
00:07:52,000 --> 00:07:54,280
Speaker 2: Yeah, So in that instance, it was closed because one

132
00:07:54,280 --> 00:07:57,840
Speaker 2: of the witnesses, Fiona Brown, had incredibly fragile mental health.

133
00:07:58,280 --> 00:08:00,600
Speaker 2: As I mentioned, Justice Lee was the one residing over

134
00:08:00,600 --> 00:08:03,600
Speaker 2: that case, and he was very keen for every element

135
00:08:03,640 --> 00:08:07,000
Speaker 2: of that case to be public. He uploaded documents and

136
00:08:07,080 --> 00:08:09,760
Speaker 2: evidence all onto an online file that was accessible to

137
00:08:09,960 --> 00:08:12,720
Speaker 2: journalists but also accessible to the general public as well,

138
00:08:13,080 --> 00:08:15,720
Speaker 2: and he wanted the case live streamed. He wanted everybody

139
00:08:15,760 --> 00:08:17,880
Speaker 2: to be able to see how this matter was playing out.

140
00:08:17,920 --> 00:08:20,360
Speaker 2: Because it was a matter that was so firmly in

141
00:08:20,440 --> 00:08:23,680
Speaker 2: the public interest. He closed the court I think, quite

142
00:08:23,760 --> 00:08:27,480
Speaker 2: reluctantly when Fyoda Brown was giving evidence in order to protect.

143
00:08:27,040 --> 00:08:30,800
Speaker 1: Her mental health. In that instance, it's really understandable that

144
00:08:30,920 --> 00:08:33,600
Speaker 1: judges would want to protect the mental health of fragile

145
00:08:33,640 --> 00:08:37,640
Speaker 1: witnesses and would want to prevent undue stress to people

146
00:08:37,679 --> 00:08:41,360
Speaker 1: who are appearing before the court. But it's worth remembering

147
00:08:41,360 --> 00:08:43,600
Speaker 1: that pretty much every matter that reaches court is the

148
00:08:43,600 --> 00:08:46,000
Speaker 1: result of some kind of conflict. Right now, someone's always

149
00:08:46,000 --> 00:08:46,560
Speaker 1: going to be upseit.

150
00:08:46,720 --> 00:08:48,840
Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely, And I think the thing to remember for

151
00:08:48,920 --> 00:08:52,640
Speaker 2: judges is that embarrassment isn't a reason for something to

152
00:08:52,679 --> 00:08:53,360
Speaker 2: be suppressed.

153
00:08:55,040 --> 00:08:58,160
Speaker 1: Coming up, do we really want to see litigans tearing

154
00:08:58,160 --> 00:09:02,040
Speaker 1: each other apart on live TV? Speaking of juicy cases,

155
00:09:02,080 --> 00:09:04,480
Speaker 1: there's a ripper going down in the Magistrates Court in

156
00:09:04,520 --> 00:09:07,920
Speaker 1: Melbourne and we've got it exclusively. It's all about a

157
00:09:08,000 --> 00:09:12,040
Speaker 1: Victoria police advisor who's face court accused of impersonating a

158
00:09:12,080 --> 00:09:15,600
Speaker 1: police officer, perjury and perverting the course of justice. Check

159
00:09:15,640 --> 00:09:18,160
Speaker 1: it out at the Australian dot Com dot a U.

160
00:09:26,440 --> 00:09:29,160
Speaker 1: In the United States, there's much more of a presumption

161
00:09:29,360 --> 00:09:33,559
Speaker 1: towards openness than in Australian courts, and we know how

162
00:09:33,640 --> 00:09:34,240
Speaker 1: that can go.

163
00:09:34,960 --> 00:09:37,800
Speaker 3: This gets you your fifteen minutes of fame, objection, your honor?

164
00:09:37,840 --> 00:09:40,120
Speaker 1: Are you manative? I could see the same thing by

165
00:09:40,120 --> 00:09:43,719
Speaker 1: taking everard as a claim for you look argument that.

166
00:09:45,120 --> 00:09:48,040
Speaker 1: In Australia, the closest we get is the Federal Court's

167
00:09:48,200 --> 00:09:54,600
Speaker 1: YouTube live stream. The other thing that the judges can't

168
00:09:54,600 --> 00:09:57,160
Speaker 1: really control is that those twenty thousand people who are

169
00:09:57,160 --> 00:09:59,560
Speaker 1: watching a live stream can then go on Twitter or

170
00:09:59,559 --> 00:10:03,679
Speaker 1: Instagram or Facebook and it's about their opinions. Say, I

171
00:10:03,720 --> 00:10:05,800
Speaker 1: think so So was lying. I watched such and such

172
00:10:05,800 --> 00:10:08,199
Speaker 1: as evidence and I think it's all a bunch of nonsense.

173
00:10:08,840 --> 00:10:11,920
Speaker 2: What's the argument between somebody watching it on a YouTube

174
00:10:11,960 --> 00:10:14,640
Speaker 2: live stream or somebody reading it in the media. You know,

175
00:10:14,880 --> 00:10:16,840
Speaker 2: we're always going to be there for the big cases,

176
00:10:16,880 --> 00:10:19,480
Speaker 2: reporting on them and putting up our articles as quickly

177
00:10:19,640 --> 00:10:21,920
Speaker 2: or you know, in real time if we can. What's

178
00:10:21,960 --> 00:10:24,640
Speaker 2: the difference between somebody reading one of those and spouting

179
00:10:24,679 --> 00:10:26,560
Speaker 2: their opinion versus watching it on a live stream.

180
00:10:26,600 --> 00:10:28,840
Speaker 1: I must say, having covered a lot of cookcases just

181
00:10:28,880 --> 00:10:30,720
Speaker 1: like you, they are fabulously entertaining.

182
00:10:30,720 --> 00:10:33,560
Speaker 2: Of course, our especially those that are live streamed. You know,

183
00:10:33,840 --> 00:10:36,360
Speaker 2: we've got Moyer Deeming v. Jon Persuto, which has been

184
00:10:36,440 --> 00:10:40,280
Speaker 2: live streamed, the Heston Russell Cases livestream. Obviously Lehmann as well,

185
00:10:40,480 --> 00:10:42,920
Speaker 2: then incredibly entertaining. It's why my job is so fun.

186
00:10:44,440 --> 00:10:47,240
Speaker 1: Okay, this is reminding me a little of the distinction

187
00:10:47,360 --> 00:10:50,120
Speaker 1: between the public interest and what the public are interested in.

188
00:10:51,840 --> 00:10:54,160
Speaker 2: Which is a funny line to walk at all times? Right,

189
00:10:54,200 --> 00:10:56,079
Speaker 2: As a journalist, you think about that all the time.

190
00:10:56,200 --> 00:10:58,080
Speaker 2: Is this story in the public interest or is this

191
00:10:58,200 --> 00:11:01,040
Speaker 2: just something that people are going to love because it's

192
00:11:01,040 --> 00:11:03,959
Speaker 2: got such sordid and juicy details. And I think that's

193
00:11:04,000 --> 00:11:06,600
Speaker 2: something that Debrah Mortema is walking quite close to in

194
00:11:06,679 --> 00:11:10,080
Speaker 2: this you know. She says that community curiosity has never

195
00:11:10,160 --> 00:11:14,040
Speaker 2: prevailed in any absolute sense when it comes to open justice,

196
00:11:14,280 --> 00:11:17,600
Speaker 2: but instead it needs to be balanced with what open

197
00:11:17,760 --> 00:11:19,199
Speaker 2: justice actually means.

198
00:11:19,760 --> 00:11:23,600
Speaker 1: Often there are seats set aside in courts for the media.

199
00:11:24,280 --> 00:11:27,400
Speaker 1: It is clear that the press are allowed into courts.

200
00:11:27,440 --> 00:11:30,120
Speaker 1: That is a basic rule, but I do feel that

201
00:11:30,160 --> 00:11:32,319
Speaker 1: a lot of the time we're treated with contempt. I've

202
00:11:32,360 --> 00:11:34,080
Speaker 1: found myself sitting on the floor a lot of times

203
00:11:34,160 --> 00:11:37,120
Speaker 1: in court hearings. A good example is the Supreme Court

204
00:11:37,280 --> 00:11:40,800
Speaker 1: trial of Christopher Michael Dawson, which we covered in such intensity.

205
00:11:41,679 --> 00:11:44,720
Speaker 1: Journalists gathered three hours before the court opened to be

206
00:11:44,760 --> 00:11:46,760
Speaker 1: able to get in and then still had to fight

207
00:11:46,760 --> 00:11:49,520
Speaker 1: for seats. Many people didn't actually make it into that courtroom.

208
00:11:49,840 --> 00:11:50,559
Speaker 1: What do you think?

209
00:11:51,160 --> 00:11:54,000
Speaker 2: It's a balancing act, isn't it? Are we part of

210
00:11:54,040 --> 00:11:58,840
Speaker 2: the system. No, But do we play a really fundamental

211
00:11:58,920 --> 00:12:01,680
Speaker 2: role in justice being served? I think yes. I think

212
00:12:01,679 --> 00:12:05,960
Speaker 2: that if we think that courts should be heard in public,

213
00:12:06,440 --> 00:12:09,360
Speaker 2: then if we're the facilitator between something occurring in a

214
00:12:09,400 --> 00:12:12,120
Speaker 2: court and the public finding out about it, then I

215
00:12:12,160 --> 00:12:15,240
Speaker 2: think that the media plays an incredibly important role in

216
00:12:15,280 --> 00:12:18,840
Speaker 2: those instances. How that relates to suppression orders and the

217
00:12:19,000 --> 00:12:23,040
Speaker 2: individual circumstances of an individual case is probably another question,

218
00:12:23,520 --> 00:12:26,520
Speaker 2: And the point that Deborah Mortemer makes is that each

219
00:12:26,679 --> 00:12:30,000
Speaker 2: case needs to be handled differently depending on the circumstances

220
00:12:30,000 --> 00:12:31,160
Speaker 2: that are before the judge.

221
00:12:32,720 --> 00:12:38,959
Speaker 1: Ellie Dudley is the Australian's Legal affairs correspondent. Thanks for

222
00:12:39,040 --> 00:12:41,080
Speaker 1: joining us on the front. The Prime Minister and the

223
00:12:41,080 --> 00:12:46,080
Speaker 1: Governor General named a new Victoria Cross recipient yesterday, Private

224
00:12:46,320 --> 00:12:51,320
Speaker 1: Richard Norden, honored for his remarkable gallantry during the Vietnam War.

225
00:12:51,800 --> 00:12:55,040
Speaker 1: You can read all about his courage under fire right

226
00:12:55,040 --> 00:12:57,679
Speaker 1: now at the Australian dot Com dot u