My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Wong. I refer the minister to the government's spending priorities for rural and regional Australia in the upcoming May budget. Is the minister aware of the Rural Australia Medical Undergraduate Scholarships, known as RAMUS, which were introduced by the previous coalition government in the year 2000? Given that the RAMUS scheme provides scholarships for students from rural and regional areas to study medicine and become doctors and the fact that more than 1,800 scholarships have been awarded since the program was introduced, will the minister guarantee that the government will not cut funding for this program in the upcoming May budget?

First, this government is the greatest supporter of regional Australia this nation has seen in a very long time. We have put more money into regional health and regional infrastructure than you ever managed to get out of the Liberal Party. The National Party really have to be known as the doormats, because they never managed to get this sort of investment into regional Australia when they were in government. They never managed to get the great Peter Costello to put this much money into regional Australia.

Senator Wong, come to the question.

I am asked to guarantee, rule in or rule out. Firstly, I will guarantee that we will ensure that we properly cost and fund our policies. We will ensure that our budget adds up. We do not have $70 billion of cuts to services including in regional Australia, unlike those opposite. We will go through the proper budget process and no-one in this chamber would expect any minister to come in and do a rule-in rule-out when it comes to the budget. I can tell you this: we do not have $70 billion worth of services to cut, which is what the opposition has.

Honourable senators interjecting—

Order! Senator Wong, just wait a minute. There is a discussion taking place between Senator Conroy and someone else on the other side. I am finding it difficult to hear your answer and I am entitled to hear your answer.

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Senator Conroy, you should remain completely orderly so I can hear the answer of Senator Wong.

Thank you, Mr President. For example, in terms of the budget, we committed $3.2 billion to health infrastructure projects with 37 per cent going to regional areas. Just recently, I understand that the Regional Priorities Round of the Education Investment Fund of $500 million has been opened. I would have thought that the National Party would have welcomed that. But no, you do not want to welcome it, do you, even though it is going to the people you represent because you cannot bear the fact that it is a Labor government which has delivered these initiatives for regional Australia.

I have a supplementary question—

Here's another wacker!

when Senator Cameron pipes down, that is.

Senator Williams, ignore the interjection. Ask your question.

I refer the minister to the Roads to Recovery program which was also introduced by the previous coalition government in the year 2000. Given the success of this program in providing direct assistance to local councils to build roads especially after the recent flooding, will the minister guarantee that the government will not cut funding for this program in the upcoming May budget?

Honourable senators interjecting—

Order! I am waiting. Senator Ludwig, when your colleagues are quiet we will proceed.

On a point of order, Mr President, we have a primary question which dealt with rural health; then we had a supplementary question that dealt with Roads to Recovery—completely outside the primary question, not even close to the primary question. I know that Senator Wong could answer the question, but the point I make is this: it should be ruled out of order. Why? Because those from the other side have continued to raise the issue that this side when answering questions may not be directly relevant. I refute that, but on the basis that they raise that issue then they should maintain that the supplementary question is part of the primary question.

Opposition senators interjecting—

Order, Senator Ludwig! There is no point of order. I call on the minister.

I am interested that the coalition appear to believe that somehow a question about a roads program is a supplementary to a question about health. I would ask you, Mr President, if you could perhaps consider whether or not that is in fact a supplementary question to the primary question.

On a point of order, Mr President, is Senator Wong now reflecting on your judgment that you just made on your last point of order?

No. There is no point of order. Senator Wong, you have 38 seconds remaining to address the question.

As I have said, Mr President, this government has invested more into regional Australia in particular to regional health, regional education and infrastructure than ever occurred when Peter Costello was Treasurer, and the National Party know that. In terms of budget speculation, I refer to my previous answer.

I have a further supplementary question, Mr President. I refer the minister to the 38c a litre fuel excise collected by the federal government. Given that the coalition had frozen this excise at 38c a litre in 1999, will the minister guarantee that the government will not increase the excise in the May budget on fuel or reintroduce indexation on the fuel excise?

This is a question about petrol prices and excise in the context of a primary question about rural doctors. I would invite you, Mr President, to perhaps consider after question time whether or not this is in fact a supplementary question.

On a point of order, Mr President, the primary question was to the senator representing the Treasurer. These are Treasury issues. If I had wanted to go to health issues I would have asked the question of the senator representing the Minister for Health. They are Treasury issues.

Honourable senators interjecting—

Order! Senator, there is no point of order. The minister has 44 seconds remaining to answer the question.

I am not speculating on the outcomes of the budget.

Mr President, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.