The Rae Review is in, and taxpayers should be trembling. Former Premier Bob Rae recommends a huge hike in spending on post-secondary education to the tune of $1.8 billion over the next two years. (Has there ever been a review which concluded government should spend less money ). Rae would increase the government's annual $4 billion budget for training, colleges and universities by 15% a year, and increase capital spending by a further $500 million.

The money would fund a number of projects, including: the establishment of a new government bureaucracy (a Council on Higher Education); "improving the student experience" (a warm and fuzzy term for increasing bureaucracy on campus); and increasing access to loans and grants (on which currently 7% of university students and 16% of college students default). Taxpayers can take some solace, in that at least the review does not recommend that tuition be abolished, and that colleges and universities have some flexibility in setting fees.

What's most worrisome about the review, however, is what it doesn't say. The 132-page report contains just one sentence about how existing dollars could be better spent ("Opportunities to identify savings strategies will also be included in this exercise.") No details are provided. Nowhere is there a questioning of the amount spent on university administration, such as the $400,000+ annual salary for the president of the University of Toronto. Nowhere is a call for an expansion of more cost-efficient types of education like e-learning, which requires no bricks and mortar to educate students, especially those in remote communities. The emphasis is on spending, not saving.

In a year when the Ontario government is forecasting a deficit of over $2 billion, where will the money come from Perhaps Mr. Rae proposes to borrow the money, like when he was premier and racked up $66 billion in public debt (on which today's students will still be paying interest when they graduate). For unless reductions are made in other government departments, there are only two sources: higher taxes or higher debt. Neither is acceptable.

Cutting other departments will not be easy, because 40% of government spending is currently consumed by health care. Rae himself notes that "since 1987, there has been an 18% decline in real per capita provincial operating spending on postsecondary education (at the same time that health expenditure per capita has risen more than 30% in real terms)." In other words, health spending is squeezing out other priorities, from education to infrastructure. Yet nowhere does Rae call for a review of universal health care, or question whether Canada can continue to afford a government-run health monopoly.

Rae does hint at a possible source for the funding: the federal surplus of $8 billion. It's no accident that this review comes on the eve of the federal budget. Between Rae's plans for post-secondary education and the federal government's plans for daycare, there will be nothing left for taxpayers at the end of the day. Forgotten is the fact that a tax cut would help pay for both types of education, by putting more money into the pockets of families whose children need it.

Until its books are balanced, Ontario is simply not in a position to commit more money to colleges and universities. The government should focus on finding efficiencies in the education system - indeed, in all its departments - before it increases education spending. Taxing more and borrowing more is not the answer - and because it fails to suggest alternatives, taxpayers should give the Rae Review a failing grade.