Davis Kelvin: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDavis Kelvin: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 26 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2652. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.KELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau) to the Minister of Transport: Will transport spending in Northland return to the level that this Government inherited given annual NZTA funding for the region has fallen by $36 million since 2008/09?Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Minister of Transport): No because to return transport spending to what the last Labour Government spent this National Government would actually have to reduce spending. After neglect from Labour we are spending $750 million to date over 40 percent more—some $30 million more each year—on Northland than the last Government so we are backing the north. The member should not be cherry-picking his figures between years. He is as tricky as Russel Norman on climate change.Mr SPEAKER: Order!Kelvin Davis: Can he confirm that in 2008-09 the Labour Government budgeted $125 million on Northland transport whereas in the last 2 years his Government has spent less than $90 million and that is why communities like the Pipiwai-Tītoki advocacy group are sick of the excuses sick of the threats from National MPs and sick of bullying from National MPs—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Just ask the question.Kelvin Davis: —when all they want is their roads sealed?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: What is clearly happening here is that the member is cherry-picking his figures. If he gets away from isolated single-year examples every year on average we have spent more and in total we have spent more because we back the north. As I said in my primary answer if we were to follow the approach of the Labour Government to Northland we would be spending a hell of a lot less there.Kelvin Davis: Has he considered that Northlanders would prefer long-term regional investment and the transport priorities they identify rather than be treated with contempt by panic bribes such as the double-laning of bridges especially when we now learn that these bridges might not even get built because the New Zealand Transport Agency says they are not worth the cost?Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You pinged the Hon Mr Bridges earlier for a comment at the end of his question because it was political but then Kelvin Davis in his questions today has been extremely provocative using misinformation as well as other epithets to throw in the Government’s direction. That does not lead to order.Mr SPEAKER: And I—[Interruption] Order! I accept the point the Minister is making. These questions start OK and then they become totally provocative and unnecessary and effectively out of order. I have two courses of action: I can rule the question out of order in which case the member loses an opportunity or I can allow the Minister to answer and give the Minister quite a lot of licence with his answer in view of the way the questions—[Interruption] Order! I would be grateful if the Hon Ruth Dyson acknowledged that when I am on my feet giving a ruling on a point of order she does not interject. On this occasion I will allow the Minister to answer the question.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: The member should quit while he is behind. [Interruption] I would be embarrassed to be asking the sorts of questions that he is asking. We have spent—Mr SPEAKER: Order!Hon SIMON BRIDGES: It is great to see I elicit that kind of excitement from the Opposition. I would be embarrassed to be asking the sorts of questions he has when we compare our record in Northland on roads with that party’s record. We have got bridges coming up we have got many other projects and a highway that unlike the Opposition we do not call the “Holiday Highway” because like that member actually we know it is what the people of Northland expect and deserve.Kelvin Davis: Supplementary question.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Before I call the member I will allow him to ask a supplementary question but if it ends where the last two have ended I will be ruling it out of order.Kelvin Davis: Has he considered that if National had only invested in Northland’s roads when it had the chance rather than slashing spending those roads might have carried National voters to the booths on Saturday rather than paving the way for an embarrassing defeat?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: This member should learn from Russel Norman who at least knows how to misleadingly play with figures.Metiria Turei: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have a point of order from Metiria Turei.Metiria Turei: You repeatedly tell the Opposition that they are not to make political points in their questions and you allowed Mr Bridges to continue with that statement. I find it offensive and would ask that you take action consistently across the House.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will hear from the Hon Gerry Brownlee. [Interruption] Order! This is an important matter.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Surely you are not going to be put in a position of ruling that it is now inappropriate to offer compliments to other members in the House.Mr SPEAKER: I am not sure that that comment helps me at all. The difficulty I have with Metiria Turei’s point of order is that I have reminded Mr Davis not to ask questions that have a lot of political implication in them. He has completely ignored my advice now on three successive occasions. As I said when I get a political question like that I will give a lot of leeway to the Minister answering it. It would be helpful when the Minister does answer the question if he did not refer to Dr Russel Norman in that way. Does the Minister have—[Interruption] Order! I am on my feet. Does the Minister have an answer to complete?Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. On a related but slightly different note there are some Speakers’ rulings around bringing parties that are not party to a question into a debate. In this instance yes Kelvin Davis asked a political question and can expect a political answer. However bringing an insult to another party into the answer is actually against—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I thank the member. If he had noted my ruling to the Minister inviting him to continue I addressed that point.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Listen I am getting to the stage when my patience will run out. If it is a fresh point of order and it is relevant to the order of the House—[Interruption] Order! I am on my feet. I am very inclined to be asking that member to leave the House. This is a point of order. I have said I will hear it from Gerry Brownlee. I hope it is useful.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well I hope it is too. My point of order is that the true offence if Mr Hipkins had thought about it was the Hon Simon Bridges drawing attention to a member who is not present in the House.Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not going to help the order of the House either. Does Mr Simon Bridges wish to complete his answer quickly?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Let me treat the question very seriously. Under any credible basis this Government has invested more in roads in the Northland infrastructure than the last Labour Government. We have an ambitious programme going forward of some $2 billion on roads which that party does not even support and dismissively calls “Holiday Highways”.Ron Mark: What is the amount of money taken out of Northland in road-user charges and fuel excise duties relative to the amount being re-invested back into Northland?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I could not say offhand but I have absolutely no doubt we invest more through central government in roading than we take out of Northland.Mr SPEAKER: Supplementary question Kelvin Davis and I do hope this one is within the Standing Orders.Kelvin Davis: Was it a good use of $70 million of public money to announce that the 10 bridges would be double-laned given that Northlanders’ priorities are flood spots potholes road slumps and slips which are not being fixed because he has slashed Northland’s road maintenance?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: No and it is great to have confirmation—[Interruption] Yes I should say. The Labour Party is against every single roading project that we try to put ahead in the north. It calls Pūhoi to Wellsford the “Holiday Highway”. It does not think that the double-lane bridges which the north knows are vital lifelines should go ahead. It opposes opposes opposes and the north knows that and that is why Labour’s candidate whom it has thrown under the bus will come a very distant third.Ron Mark: Will the Minister give the House a guarantee that no rural provincial council will suffer a reduction in the percentage subsidy it currently receives through the Government’s funding assistance for rural roads in the financial years 2016 2017 2018 and 2019? Will you give that guarantee?Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Well the member is asking a very detailed granular question that I would want to go away and check. But let us be very clear that under the Government’s policy statement in the upcoming National Land Transport Programme what we have done is make sure that there is more money in every class including in rural and regional roads. Unlike the last Labour Government we back the regions.Ron Mark: To be helpful I seek leave of the House to table a table provided by the New Zealand Transport Agency showing that over the next 4 fiscal years the financial assistance rates will be reduced for most rural councils.Mr SPEAKER: Is that document available freely on the internet? It is—then no.