Peters Winston: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 08 December 2015. Volume:710;Page:8601. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Does he condone the action of KiwiRail in closing bridge 143 over the North Auckland Line thereby severing the connection between two parts of the property owned by Owen Clements?Hon TODD McCLAY (Minister for State Owned Enterprises): I am advised that KiwiRail made the decision to close bridge 143 after 2 years of engagement with Mr Clements due to concerns with the condition of the bridge. An engineering inspection assessed the bridge as being in a dangerous condition and unsafe for use. In accordance with KiwiRail’s health and safety obligations it decided to close the bridge with immediate effect. KiwiRail takes its responsibility for safety on the rail corridor seriously and I encourage it and Mr Clements to continue to work together to resolve this issue as quickly as possible.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he aware that because there is no alternative access to one part of the severed land the farm has become uneconomic resulting in the forced sale of the owner’s dairy herd?Hon TODD McCLAY: Although this is an operational matter that KiwiRail is responsible for I did receive a letter from Mr Clements on 24 March of this year. On 25 March I wrote to KiwiRail on his behalf. KiwiRail has said that it is not responsible for the maintenance of this bridge. In this case the responsibility to maintain upgrade and replace the bridge lies with the bridge’s users. I do understand that KiwiRail is in discussion with Mr Clements and I would encourage both parties to continue to work together towards an outcome where there is safe access to the rail network for all concerned and equal access to the property owner.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does he acknowledge that the bridge was built because KiwiRail’s predecessor had severed the property in 1922 with the railway line that KiwiRail was responsible for maintenance and repairs for decades and that KiwiRail should keep it open; if not why not?Hon TODD McCLAY: No. I do not have that degree of detail. However what I can speak to is that in 1919 at the time the rail was built the farm had access via Wairere Road on both sides of the rail corridor and it was not landlocked. I understand that access changed to Mr Clements land and this occurred as a result of council roading initiatives in 1997 which resulted in the bridge becoming the only viable route for access to the two parts of his farm. Again I understand that KiwiRail is in discussions with Mr Clements. This is an issue of safety on the rail corridor and for users of the bridge. I encourage both parties to discuss this.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does he accept that under section 169(1) of the Public Works Act 1981 and prior legislation that KiwiRail and the Minister because of that section have a continuing statutory obligation to “provide access to the land so cut off or between the … land so separated”?Hon TODD McCLAY: KiwiRail first raised this issue with Mr Clements in December 2013. There have been many ongoing letters and discussions between them. I do not have the level of detail the member has raised. If he would like to set me down a question I would be happy to look into it for him.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Given that the Minister wrote a letter to Mr Clements and looking at the Act in the decades under which KiwiRail maintained that bridge will he now act to see that KiwiRail maintains and reopens the bridge with the appropriate compensation for Mr Clements and not use its funds to try to beat a farmer down; if not why not?Hon TODD McCLAY: No. There is no question that KiwiRail is beating a farmer down. Its focus is on safety for the use of that bridge and I encourage both parties to continue to talk together in good faith to resolve this situation as quickly as they can.