Johnny Au
Senior Member
It would be great to have this thread be renamed to simply “Ontario Science Centre” as we have moved on from just the pedestrian bridge.
|
|
|
Surma noted that the decision to close the museum immediately was made by the science centre’s board of directors shortly after the province reviewed the engineering report.
“It was the board, the science centre board, that made that very sad and difficult decision but we as the government stand by that decision,” she said.
Part of it is also patronage - if you look at the board of ROM or AGO, it's a A-list of money/power; also the artifacts themselves are worth money - OSC doesn't have this kind of asset. Neither ROM nor AGO are purely provincial constructs either.
I do note with a rather cynical sense of irony that it is the PCs that delivered the coup d'grace to the ideals of their predecessors. You know, spa and beers over nature and science as priorities of investments - you get who you voted for.
AoD
from the article:Toronto, Canada & Global Breaking News – CP24
Most recent News News business news stories and video from CP24www.cp24.com
a) Who appointed the board and b) the track record of this government overriding arms length agencies/boards/commissions/crown corps (e.g. LCBO) is *quite* interesting. Clearly Minister Surma treat the public as fools. If you are going to fake tears, try a little harder.
AoD
Some in the community have questioned the urgency of the closure and have suggested that the province could fix some of the panels in most need of repair in an effort to keep the centre open to the public for a little while longer.
Surma told reporters Monday that the engineers who assessed the site advised against doing that.
“The engineers were quite specific when we spoke to them that if we were to do work on the roof, we should replace the roof in its entirety and the building would have to be closed through that period of time, two to five years just the roof work alone,” Surma said.
The engineering report indicated that replacing the roof would cost anywhere from $22 million and $40 million and the province has previously said that a minimum capital investment of $478 million would be needed to “address outdated and failing infrastructure” as well as “program requirements” at the aging museum.
In addition, museums and art galleries on the level of the ROM and AGO have international prominence and deep pocketed benefactors so there is much more at stake if the province wanted to play populist silly bugger. Both have holdings that are valued into the millions and at least some of it they likely they do not own (loaned from another museum or collector). When it's the roof over somebody else's really expensive stuff that you are responsible for, it focusses the mind.Part of it is also patronage - if you look at the board of ROM or AGO, it's a A-list of money/power; also the artifacts themselves are worth money - OSC doesn't have this kind of asset. Neither ROM nor AGO are purely provincial constructs either.
I do note with a rather cynical sense of irony that it is the PCs that delivered the coup d'grace to the ideals of their predecessors. You know, spa and beers over nature and science as priorities of investments - you get who you voted for.
AoD
I fail to understand why Torontonians are so against moving the Science Centre to near Ontario Place. It is a far nicer and more convenient location.
Can't disagree with this. Took the kids there twice a month for the last 5 years and it was incredibly run down. And just plain grungy inside.The OSC is in pretty bad shape and that cannot be blamed on Ford. It has basically been neglected for 30 years.
They can certainly keep some of the building for historic reasons.
I think some new information:How the Ontario Science Centre was suddenly shut down — and why
Ontario’s auditor general had warned that “deferred maintenance projects that were at risk of critical failure have been repeatedly denied funding” at the Science Centre.www.thestar.com
There is 1 thing common among all of Ford's scandals....Communication and messaging.I think some new information:
One reason for immediate closure is to give staff time to plan for whatever science centre we are going to have (temporarily). The messaging sounds as if this would be not possible to achieve in tandem of keeping it open.
Many other buildings (in Ontario) have the same material used... Are now being looked at (will they be closed as swiftly as OSC?) - given children frequent involved with OSC, I can understand the risk aversion.
The auditor general has listed numerous issues with the OSC that have been ignored since 2017 (no surprise here), a year before Ford took office.
It would take 2 to 5 years to replace the roof. Possibly beyond the planned move date.
I still find the communication about the whole thing poorly managed... And the messaging (as shown with other arms length agencies) seems to be very controlled. Why was the OSC not able to share why the bridge was closed as it was structurally not sound? We now know IO ordered the closure: it would cost 16 million to repair (I imagine the shuttle busses weren't as pricey for the 6 years planned until move). They knew they were moving it, so presumably didn't fund.
One final interesting tidbit I found interesting:
View attachment 575309
Just to stir the pot.... Do we think there was evidence of the problem? It sounds like this isn't something you know to lookout for... Unless you have a motive...?