Peters Winston: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 01 April 2015. Volume:704;Page:2785. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements regarding the Northland by-election?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes in the context they were given.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does he stand by his statement regarding the 10 one-lane bridges that “these bridges need upgrading and they will be.”; if so how does he explain a massive variation in costings of between $32 million and $69 million?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In answer to the first part of the question yes; in answer to the second part of the question not all the work has been done to be absolutely sure of what the final costs will be. That is standard whenever we do procurement around new infrastructure like roading.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Whose idea was it to double lane the 10 bridges and on what date was he informed that the announcement would be made?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In answer to the first part of the question Cabinet.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Well how does he square that answer with the Northland National Party candidate’s statement that it was his idea? Who is not telling the truth here?Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question has been asked.Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The member did not ask me where the idea originated from.Ron Mark: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I know that you study the Hansard of questions and answers and I know that you are fully aware that these questions were asked on 10 March and on 17 March and that the Ministers and Cabinet particularly the Minister of Transport have had all that time to get these answers right and to be able to answer them truthfully in the House. I ask that you require them to do that.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am not sure that is a point of order but if the member thinks that an answer has been given in this House that is incorrect there is an appropriate way to deal with that and it is not via a point of order.Ron Mark: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. But surely it would be far cheaper for the taxpayer if we do not go through—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. That is certainly not a clarification and it is not a point of order.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he in favour of the “Darby and Joan” Bridge being double-laned considering that it would require cutting down two landmark protected native kauri trees and that very low numbers of vehicles actually use the bridge—often just to see those kauri trees?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am advised that the member is incorrect in the assumptions he made in his question.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. What has happened here is that the Prime Minister has got up and challenged the very veracity of the question which simply was that it is a landmark bridge—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is a point of order.Rt Hon Winston Peters: —and it got an environmental award because it harmonises with the two kauri trees and he says I am incorrect with my assumptions.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Point of order.Mr SPEAKER: No I do not need assistance from the member. The member asked a question. The Prime Minister disputed the facts that are in that question. That is the right of the Prime Minister. The way forward is supplementary questions.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: No I have ruled on this matter. I am not putting up with a repetition of yesterday where my points—[Interruption] Would the member sit down. [Interruption] Order! I am very tempted to be asking the member to leave. The member can continue asking his supplementary questions if he has some left but I have ruled that the question that was asked has been addressed.Rt Hon Winston Peters: When I said that somebody was in favour of the “Darby and Joan” Bridge being double-laned and that it would end the landmark historical and environmental award given to this bridge because of the kauri trees that have to be cut down which one of those assumptions was wrong?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: That was not the question the member asked me.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have studied the Westminster system all around the world and I have never seen—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! A point of order has been called. I will listen to it and I expect to listen to it in silence. Would the member quickly get to his point of order.Rt Hon Winston Peters: My point of order is that I am asking the Prime Minister to outline what assumptions he says we have got wrong in our questions on this matter.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I think the problem here is that had Mr Peters been able to table a full design specification for the renewed “Darby and Joan” Bridge he might be able to make the assertions he has but he cannot and he does not need to make these assertions until that is the case.Mr SPEAKER: I am not sure that helps us forward in this case. The Rt Hon Winston Peters has now been—Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Point of order.Mr SPEAKER: No I am on my feet. He has repeated now a question that is not the question he asked and that is the difficulty. The question was a very long-winded question. The Prime Minister has addressed that question—I accept not to the member’s satisfaction. [Interruption] Order! The way forward is further supplementary questions. It is not to then question the answer that has been given.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked this question No. 4 in one way and the answer was that I got the assumptions wrong. I asked the question in a different way—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Again I have dealt with this. Sit down. The member asked the question. The Prime Minister addressed the question—I have said to my satisfaction; I accept it is not to the member’s satisfaction. The way forward is further supplementary questions.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he in favour of the “Darby and Joan” Bridge being double-laned considering that it would require cutting down two landmark protected native kauri trees and that very low numbers of vehicles actually use the bridge—often just to see those trees?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: In answer to the first part of the question yes. In answer to the second part of the question the member is wrong. The trees will not be cut down.