Parliamentary regulations may have been broken and public money misused when the Government came up with the ill-fated 10-bridges promise during the Northland byelection.
The breach in protocol has Labour's Transport spokesman Phil Twyford suggesting Mickey Mouse could have done a better job of building in Northland.
Mr Twyford said taxpayers' money had been used wrongly in the process leading up to the $69 million promise to double-lane 10 one-laned bridges on Northland's highways.
That scheme was announced by Transport Minister Simon Bridges two weeks before the byelection date.
But Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister, Bill English says it is "against the rules" for Government officials and resources to be used for proposals that belong to individual political parties.
Mr English's staff yesterday supplied the Northern Advocate with a copy of the rules confirming this.
Yet records obtained under the Official Information Act show that Government officials - and taxpayer resources - were working on the matter of Northland's bridges as late as two days before Transport Minister Simon Bridges' surprising announcement on March 9.
"What a Mickey Mouse operation," Mr Twyford said.
"Simon Bridges' office frantically trying to get transport officials to come up with a list of bridges, when Finance Minister Bill English says in Parliament that it is against the rules to use public servants to develop and cost a party's campaign proposal.
"It would be funny if it wasn't such a gross abuse of public money and the democratic process."
While New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) was asked to supply details about the number of highway bridges on Northland's state highways and estimates for replacing them, the agency was not informed about the Government's scheme. NZTA was told about it only the day before it was announced publicly.
Only three of the bridges were on NZTA's priority list for funding between now and 2018.
In answer to questions in the House by Labour MP Grant Robertson, Mr English said the costs of the scheme had not been referred to him because a political party's proposal (as opposed to a Governmental one) would not be costed by Treasury.