Was not naming father fraud too?

Metiria Turei admitted she didn’t admit to having flatmates in order to collect a bigger benefit payment.

Rodney Hide at the NBR and Whaleoil have past quotes which show she didn’t name the baby’s father when she not only knew who he was but ensured he maintained a relationship with his daughter and took money from him and his family.

Is that fraud too?

After earlier saying she’d pay back the money if WINZ asked her to, she’s now decided she’ll pay it back anyway.

Will it be just the extra accommodation payment she got or should she, or the child’s father, also be paying what he would have been liable for had she named him and will anyone be looking into whether the help she got from him, his family and her own should have been declared too?

Life on a benefit wasn’t easy back then and isn’t now.

But a lot of people managed then and manage now without committing fraud.

A lot more people work hard to pay taxes.

Most accept the necessity of doing so to help people in genuine need, a lot fewer are happy to support someone who’s getting more than they’re entitled to through fraud.

39 Responses to Was not naming father fraud too?

  1. alwyn says:

    I’ll pay back what I owe.
    That doesn’t mean anything at all if the Department doesn’t come up with a number and probably it’ll have to be one she agrees with.
    She claims not to know what she might owe.
    She also doesn’t show any signs of helping the Department. Will she tell them, for example, how many people were in each flat and what they paid her as rent?
    I’ll bet she doesn’t.
    I think the Department should simply add up the total she received over the entire period and tell her that is the amount, along with any penalties they can apply. Then they should report her to the Police and claim she had committed fraud.


  2. Andrei says:


    people who live in glass houses should not throw stones – let us not forget the piece of creative accounting our current Prime Minister engaged in to have the taxpayers pay him rent to live in his Karori Mansion and the amount of money involved in that scam makes anything Metiria Turei might have squeezed look like chickenfeed

    Let’s face it the vast majority of politicians are self serving scuzzbags


  3. invercargillgreen says:

    Metiria’s dishonesty was motivated by looking after her child and she has never wanted an extravagant lifestyle. I have visited her home and while it has character it is essentially a two bedroom cottage and it’s value is less than half the national average. She donates a good amount of her salary to good causes and back to the Green Party.

    What is the motivation for tax fraudsters?

    What is legal is not always moral.

    $40,000 of taxpayers funds per annum subsidised Bill English’s mansion until he was caught out and young Todd Barclay gets to keep his salary for a while as he pays off his $750,000 Arrowtown house. Metiria wouldn’t have gained anything like that.

    The truth is that benefit fraud is a tiny fraction of the amount ripped off by tax fraudsters. Many beneficiaries have shared their own stories and they too were motivated by feeding and housing their kids, it’s tough being honest when you have to watch your children go hungry and there weren’t so many foodbanks then.




  4. Teletext says:

    IG nice to see you admit that MT was dishonest and not excuse her crime as many others are. Re English’s “crime”, at least he paid the money back straight away and TB is entitled to his salary as he hasn’t resigned and will be back working in Wellington this coming week.
    IG, I hope that you don’t get too upset if MT is prosecuted and then has to resign from parliament when found guilty even if her punishment is only a slap with a wet bus ticket.


  5. Andrei says:

    ” Re English’s “crime”, at least he paid the money back straight away”

    Nonsense Teletext – for about two weeks the New Zealand public was treated to the Patrician Bill English and his proxies telling us his rort was within the rules

    It was only when it became politically untenable that this “silver spooner” paid it back

    I am no fan of the Greens or Metiria Turei but I can tell you for nothing we serfs have far more sympathy with what she did (without necessarily approving it or that DPB lifestyle) than we do for Bill English’s little gambit

    There is nothing new in this , the rich and the powerful make the rules to suit themselves and always have . So in days of yore the Lord of the manor would claim the woods and the game that lived therein and when a serf was caught with a dead rabbit taken to feed his kids the Lord would string him up on the gallows leaving his starving kids orphans

    We are getting better but the game keepers still belong the the Lords and are used as muscle to keep the Lords wealthy and the serfs in their place


  6. homepaddock says:

    Bill English did not commit a crime. What he did was okay within the rules. You can argue the rules are wrong, and I have sympathy with that, but nothing he did was against those rules. Also he not only returned everything he had been paid he then did not take the allowance he could have for living in his own house rather than a Ministerial one.

    That is very different from lying about the baby’s father and flatmates.

    Life on a benefit has never been easy but lots of people manage without lying and without the support from family which Turei had.

    It’s not just what she did but that she has shown no contrition for doing it.


  7. invercargillgreen says:

    What is legal isn’t always moral. National continually use the “it’s legal” excuse for much that is morally inexcusable. Parliament is sovereign and 51% of the vote can pass a new law that has no moral basis.

    Much of our legislation passed under National breaches the many human rights treaties we have signed.

    It was legal to close schools in Christchurch when the families and children needed stability.

    It was legal for Bill to suck $40,000 from the tax payer to subsidise his $1.2 million Karori home.

    It is legal for Todd Barclay to continue receiving a substantial salary after failing numerous ethical breeches. He was asked on the last campaign trail if he felt working for a tobacco company was a good moral choice, he wouldn’t answer directly, but it was legal.

    It was illegal for Metiria to lie about how many people were living in her flat so that she could better support her child on a benefit that was designed not to be liveable by Ruth Richardson. Metiria is not sorry that she lied to feed her daughter but is prepared to come clean. The fact is that the current benefit system is supposed to make it difficult for those receiving it so that low wage jobs are an attractive option. However, it is also punishing the many decent people who are just going through a tough time and need a hand up, not a stick. Paula Bennett and Metiria were not criminals because they were single mothers, they just needed a little support to fulfil their promise. Considering the number of single mums who have lied about relationships, partners and accommodation just to survive, this is something that needs some compassionate light shone on it, not another sledgehammer.

    I can’t believe the self-righteous indignation from all the people who haven’t been strictly honest when managing their tax returns or have paid or accepted cash jobs. There is more than one way to steal from the state…



  8. Mr E says:

    We can establish the following:
    Being on a benefit can be hard.
    That hardship doesn’t necessarily lead to crime.

    Metiria is doing her best to conflate benefit taking with crime.

    The problem is – she has done little to establish just how hard it was for her on the benefit to convince people that crime was necessary. Instead she appears to avoid discussing her own situation.

    Greens have gone fishing for other examples in some weird – ‘everyone is doing it’ claim. It seems their efforts are to prove widespread fraud to remove the need for Metiria to describe her situation.

    For me – if I am empathise with her, I need to understand her situation well. A situation she avoids discussing.

    Instead what is happening is many articles like this are raising a lot of doubt. Flatmates, supportive unnamed father, supportive families, rate of training – all raise questions. Questions that MSM seem to be ignoring.

    I watched her interview on Q&A and was disappointed in the interviewing. I did recognise some some emotion in her voice towards the end of the interview, when questioned about her future career. I suspect she needs more support from her peers because I don’t expect this issue to be over for some time.

    Despite this being her own doing, I do empathise with her current hardship. The scrutiny will be hard particularly when it casts a shadow on her career.

    I think the best thing she can do is detail all of the aspects of life that lead to her crime. That includes accounting for the money. And feed that to the public. If she wants to use her situation to create change we have a right to the detail and a right to judge.

    If she really believes she was forced to commit crime, describing that reasoning should be easy not hard.

    I suspect only then will she be able to move forward.


  9. invercargillgreen says:

    Define “hard” Mr E. It is a relative term and must surely be based on past experience. Some feel that they should be able to buy healthy food each week and the odd flat white. Metiria grew up in poverty and her family even slept in a car on occasions when her father was unemployed. Her personal life is still a simple one. It must have been really hard when she was studying too and child care wasn’t subsidised then. This was also in the context of Ruth Richardson having just slashed benefits (already meagre) by 25%.

    Why the hell should she itemise all her living expenses at the time, how much humiliation do beneficiaries and young parents have to endure to prove they are deserving of support? Ruth Richardson purposely cut benefits so that they would be difficult to live on. Many solo mums at the time did similar things to survive. Metiria’s point was that sole parents should not be continually confronted with those sorts of soul destroying choices:
    -should I buy fresh veges and milk or pay the power bill?
    -do I swallow my pride and use the food bank again or miss a meal or two
    -should I pay for the school trip or make my child pretend they are sick for the day to hide the humiliation of not being able to afford it (a common thing).
    -I knew a parent who got their kid into a high decile school but the stationary list included an ipad, to pay for it the parent used a loan shark (out of desperation and ignorance).
    -do I not be fully honest about who is living in the house for a regular few dollars (like many did) or do I just hope that I can scrape by.

    For all we know Paula Bennett may have done similar, she has been very gracious and refused to judge Metiria on her admission as she admits it was a very tough time.

    Some support from Chris Trotter: http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.co.nz/2017/07/sins-of-admission-response-to-john.html


  10. To say that Paula Bennett “may have done similar” is absolute speculation IG, and one must wonder at your motivation for doing so.

    Metiria Turei stated publicly last month that she refused to name the father of her child so that he wouldn’t be hassled by WINZ, thus affecting his relationship with his daughter. That’s a cop out.

    Bringing a child into the world, whether you live with the other parent or not brings with it legal, ethical and moral responsibilities. By making a decision not to tell WINZ who the father of her child was, Turei abrogated her responsibility. Either she made an under-the-table deal with him about financial support (another potential fraud), or she allowed the taxpayer to take financial responsibility for her child rather than the father. Neither option does her any credit whatsoever.


  11. Mr E says:

    Invercargill Green,

    “Why the hell should she itemise all her living expenses at the time, how much humiliation do beneficiaries and young parents have to endure to prove they are deserving of support?”

    What you seem to be forgetting is Metiria is a public figure – a candidate for government. And also a person that is using her law breaking in an attempt to gain support for cause.

    As such I think the public has the right to know the details of her situation. To a relatively detailed level.

    Currently the rhetoric is ‘I had to break the law’. And the reasoning seems to be ‘because I was studying and had a baby’.

    I am sorry but that just does not pass any transparency standard. It doesn’t convince me ore many others that what she did was justified.

    She needs to come clean.

    I think WINZ needs to investigate and she needs to be absolutely transparent with them. And the findings need to be made public. Until that point I have little faith in her.

    I would suggest we should all hold her to that standard.


  12. Mr E says:

    And now we find out – whilst she was lying to WINZ to get more than she was entitled to she was also campaigning for 2 other political parties.


    Whilst all this is drip fed out – it is going to be a long painful situation.


  13. Richard says:

    MT’S behaviour, in my view, is simply criminal and should be dealt with accordingly.

    A bigger issue is what do the Greens now represent? They have moved from envitronmentalists to socialists, MT capping it off.

    Many sitting Green MP’s must now be feeling very uncomfortable

    MT will no doubt continue to dig a deeper hole for her party to fall into


  14. MT will no doubt continue to dig a deeper hole for her party to fall into

    You say that as though it’s a bad thing Richard…


  15. Richard says:

    KS – No, I think its great. The original Greens offered a environmental perspective to politics lacking in other parties; Nats, Lab and this was supported by parts of the electorate- hence the Green seats in the house. Most of their ideas are mad and impractical but they have had influence- difficult to define or quantify.
    They have lost their way- green top and red underbelly- like a radish- strong taste unless sliced OR rhubarb best pickled or canned —-


  16. Namewitheld says:

    Many sitting Green MP’s must now be feeling very uncomfortable
    No.. There is no evidence of that at all. Apart from the pompous self-important drivel emanating from this blog’s resident green apologist, the silence is deafening. No sign of condemnation at all. Perhaps they have come to realize the sheer hypocritical futility of trying to defend the thief and fraudster in their midst who made a systematic and successful attempt to rort the system over several years.


  17. invercargillgreen says:

    “Most of their ideas are mad and impractical but they have had influence- difficult to define or quantify.”
    Housing all families in healthy homes, reducing rubbish and waste, reducing child poverty, having clean rivers, expecting parties to have their policies independently costed, actually reducing our carbon emissions, investing in innovative, productive industry …

    All easy to define and quantify, but all too hard apparently. How many other areas will we drop to the bottom of the developed world to support our boom and bust economy, based on the unsustainable?

    How has the government’s support of the coal and oil industry gone?

    How has the support of property speculation gone?

    How has doubling the value of our agricultural exports through dairy intensification gone?

    How has uncontrolled tourism gone?

    How has the use of cheap migrant labour gone for lifting productivity and housing availability?

    How are we going with the $12.5 billion investment in motorways, has it reduced the traffic issues in Auckland?

    How did we go with our tax haven status, why did all those investors disappear when greater transparency was required.

    Where are we with our Saudi free trade agreement after the $11 million bribe?

    I think i would rather have a Green future than putting up with this short sighted nonsense.


  18. freddy says:

    Oddly, Metiria Turie has become the face of greed, she’s making the NBR rich listers look like saints. Life can be weird, and entertaining.


  19. Andrei says:

    Oddly, Metiria Turie has become the face of greed, she’s making the NBR rich listers look like saints. Life can be weird, and entertaining.

    What a load of garbage, for all her sins Metiria Turei lives a very modest lifestyle – you National party drones have no insight which is why National will probably loose the next election and deservedly so

    And the fact you are beating this crap up strongly suggests that National has very little to offer the voter

    The fifth National Government is tired lead by a man who failed dismally as leader of the opposition years ago and has the backbone of a jellyfish

    Look at this dreary effort


  20. homepaddock says:

    Andrei – National is the first government in 40 years to increase benefits and it has put a lot of effort into tackling the causes of benefit dependence and successfully helping beneficiaries into work.

    This wouldn’t be a continuing issue if she had accepted responsibility, apologised, told the whole story and said she’s repay what she owes from the start.

    Bill has accepted responsibility for 2001’s defeat and more made amends by all he’s achieved since.


  21. Andrei says:

    You know Ele the last time I was motivated to vote was on the referendum on the Sue Bradford anti smacking thing for all the good it did, which was none

    Last time I voted in a general election was 2008 – and a waste of time that was too

    The politicians are not even talking about the things that matter to me and regardless of who gets in will continue to advance the so called “progressive” agenda, an agenda which will not be part of the election year rhetoric

    Consider this – Paula Bennett and Metiria Turei used single motherhood to fund a tertiary education whereas my eldest funded her education by working for five years in the high needs unit of an old peoples home cleaning the shit off dementia patients –

    Now she has a masters degree, is married and about to start a family in the time honoured fashion and when she does her husband will be a patriarchal male while she will be sneered at as a mere hausfrau for wanting to stay home and raise their children as well rounded individuals in the context of a strong family

    And what parties are promoting policies to encourage that approach to life? None. They are all promoting things to discourage it – most graduates start their working life with major debts which preclude starting a family until it is too late in many cases for example ( is this an election issue?) Hell no but it should be

    Bill English was on the news last night telling Epson voters to vote for David Seymore who is behind the Death with dignity” Bill which should really be titled the “put Granny down before our inheritance is all spent ” bill

    He was also promoting Peter Dunne in Ohariu, a man who has been in Parliament longer than most New Zealanders have been alive and has achieved this by being a political chameleon, running with the hares and hunting with the hounds

    What is there to inspire me and people who think like me to vote?

    That inane ad that says nothing?

    Despite Parliament being called The House of Representatives ordinary normal hard working people are not represented in it and have very little say in who gets a seat in it


  22. invercargillgreen says:

    “National is the first government in 40 years to increase benefits and it has put a lot of effort into tackling the causes of benefit dependence and successfully helping beneficiaries into work.”

    National is also the first government to set water standards and invest in emergency housing.

    Recent reports show that beneficiaries are still experiencing declining living standards despite National’s generosity, while the really rich have seen their wealth shoot u again.

    Our rivers have never been in a worst state and our native species have never been in a more threatening position for survival.

    Our housing crisis makes us the worst in the developed world.

    After nine years of smoke and mirrors about how wonderful our economy is, when everything is actually in crisis and decline, I think we need a change.

    I especially don’t understand the rationale of paying $14 billion for overseas carbon credits (to profit those countries actually doing something) when the same money could be invested here to make us carbon neutral. Under this government we have seen our emissions increase by 20%, our second biggest industry is our second biggest user of coal, and we keep building billions of dollars of roads rather than support rail and public transport that is far more cost effective. Can anyone explain?


  23. Namewitheld says:

    If further evidence was needed that the green minds occupy a different planet to the rest of the human race, just read the above off-topic drivel in response to the question..
    Was not naming father fraud too?
    Talk about smoke and mirrors
    Can anyone explain?


  24. Mr E says:

    Invercargill Green,

    “Our rivers have never been in a worst state”

    You must realise that you can’t qualify that. Anecdotally there are some shocking stories of the historical state of water.

    Back to Metiria – just when will she resign? I just imagine the Greens dumping all those plastic billboards and cringing while they do it.


  25. Indeed Mr E; they’ll either have to go to landfill, or be burned.

    Metiria Turei’s smug justification of a deliberate and sustained fraud against the taxpayer is going to cost the Greens, as is James Shaw’s statement that he is “proud” of her. Just over a month ago he was calling for Todd Barclay’s head on a platter for something of far less consequence that the fraud Ms Turei has already confessed to, and about which more is becoming known every day.

    When I met James Shaw last year he made a very positive impression as a moderate who could potentially mainstream the Greens along with Julie Anne Genter. But once again the activist, anarchist wing of the party led by former Random Trollop Metiria Turei seems to have won the battle.


  26. Mr E says:

    There seems to be a high level of desperation over this issue from the left. A lot of ‘look over there’ calls. Let’s list them.
    -what about Bill’s accomodation claim
    – where’s the outrage regarding Todd
    – where’s the outrage regarding oravita
    – others commit fraud on the benefit
    – attention was needed on benefit payments.
    – etc

    These are all desperate attempts to distract from the issue at hand. Smoke and mirrors per se.

    It is like lefties are suggesting other people do bad things and therefore so can the Greens – without reprisal.

    I’m disappointed in other Greens for this reason. They often try to claim some moral high ground, but they’ve undoubtably ground down to a very low, I think disgusting level.


  27. Mr E you have totally missed the point. Metiria doesn’t expect her “fraud” to be excused and even expects to pay it back. The point is that most beneficiaries can’t survive on their benefits without relying on other forms of charity or even dishonesty. A good number of the children who live in poverty live in these circumstances. In most cases any efforts to get more money is to buy food or pay for heating. What was Bill’s excuse?

    The reason for the admission (it was hardly a smug one) was to enable an open debate on the level of support that should be provided. Welfare should provide a hand up and it is now clear that few born in poverty now escape. In earlier times welfare support provided a stepping stone to independence whereas now it just ensures enduring poverty.


  28. Mr E you have totally missed the point. Metiria doesn’t expect her “fraud” to be excused and even expects to pay it back.

    Wow Dave; that’s big of her! After all, she admitted to this fraud beginning more than 20 years ago.

    I hope MSD treats her absolutely as they would treat anyone accused of fraud, and that she is prosecuted for what was a deliberate and sustained fraud over a long period; that’s by her own admission. To not prosecute her because of her position, because of the time expired or because of her self-justification would be an insult to the taxpayers she has confessed to defrauding.


  29. Namewitheld says:

    Yes KS, I wonder just who is missing the point.
    What saddens me more is that according to the latest poll at least, there are still people who support the odious green slug and her theft from and continued unrepentant mockery of all Honest citizens.

    Media Worm turns on Green Slug.


  30. I don’t think name-calling is the way to go NW. Ms Turei is trying to turn this into some sort of moral crusade, but at the moment she is a long way from the moral high ground.


  31. Will says:

    Can anyone explain?

    I could be wrong, but I think it’s 1.4 billion Dave, not fourteen, and yes it’s an appalling rip-off, but that’s globalism for you. You have to pay to play.

    We will not be carbon neutral until fossil fuels are redundant and we should all stop worrying about it. There is no evidence co2 is damaging to the environment – none at all. Quite the contrary. If you don’t agree, then prove what you say. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs, but you offer none.

    We build roads instead of rails because the industrial revolution was nearly two centuries ago and we are a modern state. Trains are a relic of the past set to become historical curiosities like clipper ships and windjammers.


  32. invercargillgreen says:

    $14 billion over 10 years. Imagine what we could do if we spent that much here on becoming carbon neutral, rather than chucking it overseas: http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/05/new-zealand-to-spend-14-billion-to-meet-paris-agreement-targets.html

    The motorways currently being built do not pass cost benefit analysis and rail now carries more freight than ever before in NZ. I also note that passenger rail is an essential part of all modern economies.

    It is really sad to see that you are still in denial about the the overwhelming amount of climate science supporting the same view. You must get your information from the same sources as President Trump.

    I thought the immoral elements to our country are allowing 28% of our children to live in poverty, having the worst statistics for child health and welfare in the developed world and the worst housing statistics.

    I have noted a growing number of well-written opinion pieces from many backgrounds stepping up in support of Metiria, far more than has been critical. The up-swelling of support strengthens daily, as has our climb in the polls.


  33. Will says:

    I was imagining leaving all that money with its owners, the people who earned it. You know, instead of stealing it. When did you get the idea it was yours to dispose of?

    Trains take goods and people from train stations to other train stations, not where they actually need to go. In horribly overcrowded places this may be the only option left, but fortunately we are not there yet. Orcland maybe.

    I get my information from published data and historical sources and draw my own conclusions. I don’t know what President Trump does. I asked you to prove that man’s co2 emissions are causing dangerous warming.

    I knew you couldn’t do it.


  34. invercargillgreen says:

    “I was imagining leaving all that money with its owners…”

    You’ve lost me, Will, are you referring to the $14 billion in carbon credits? Are you suggesting that overseas companies now dominate our economy so we are just paying them back?

    Trains are part of an integrated transport system and the most economical long haul option. Much of the milk product produced in Southland is sent by train to the appropriate ports. Trains are also very economical people movers and help reduce our current account deficit by reducing our spending on overseas oil.

    In our most populated cities (where over half our population lives and works) they enable people to travel in a manner where they can still work. Try sorting out paper work while you drive a car.

    I think you have passed on your sources of information for climate change in the past, very dodgy. I remember you relied on the Fox News weatherman web site and was very dismissive of national science institutions and NASA.


  35. Will says:

    I never watch Fox News. I don’t use Television at all. Not that that matters. The point is…still no proof or even evidence. I can provide evidence that co2 is harmless, which you could check if you chose to.

    I refer to carbon taxes Dave. Money taken from people under false pretences. Stolen. Because you can not prove what you claim.

    Sounds like trains are well sorted then. Good. You don’t know what it’s like up here. The traffic is insane and no train is ever going to come through my district. We’re getting desperate.

    But I don’t care about that. Just want hard evidence that human emissions cause dangerous warming. You people have had a good run with this but you’re being called on it now.



  36. invercargillgreen says:

    Will, all I can say is that you live in some sort of alternative universe where you obviously are’t aware of what is actually happening in this one.

    You do realise that the Paris Agreement came from the science?

    You must realise that investing in rail has positive ripple effects of removing road traffic from all over the place. http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/newsroom/reports/2012/Passenger_Railways_Subsidy.pdf

    You are now an increasingly minor voice in the big wide world, Will.

    It is really sad that this Government wants to be a follower, not a leader, and we are now so far behind the rest of the world in so many areas, we are risking becoming third world.


  37. eah says:

    Dave I’m all too familiar with this stuff. I had decades of religion in my youth. While I can see value in much of it and don’t regret those years, there came a time when I just wanted to know where the evidence was. The proof. I am a natural sceptic and all I got was the same old runaround I am seeing from you. You’ve got nothing.

    The real problem you have is that co2 doesn’t really trap heat, it just deflects certain photons. That may slow down heat loss a tiny amount but 400 ppm isn’t enough to have a measurable effect. And as for methane…1.85ppm is just ridiculous. And almost all of that minuscule amount is natural.

    New Zealand will never lead the world in anything, we are too small and why would we want too? What good did it do England or America? We have a wonderful little country here, if we don’t want to become third world…don’t import the Third World.

    I am fine with being a minor voice if I am right and have the courage to speak out. The child who said the Emperor has no clothes was a minor voice. The big wide world played along, but remember the warning about fooling all of the people all of the time.

    This farce will end your movement for good, and good riddance.


  38. eah says:

    wtf? Don’t know why my name has changed…will summon teenager.



  39. invercargillgreen says:

    I rely on the science from 98% of the world’s scientist who are in agreement and are much more knowledgeable than I.


    Those who do not support the substantial peer reviewed science are no different from flat earth believers I believe.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: