Crumbling infrastructure puts federal labs in jeopardy.

• Author: Ross, Ian
• Position: NEWS

Contrary to dire warnings in a National Resources Canada (NRCan) internal report about crumbling infrastructure at federal labs, the roof isn't ready to cave in at Sault Ste. Marie's Great Lakes Forestry Centre, insists its regional director general.

"Walls are not collapsing around us," says Pardeep Ahluwalia, "but that doesn't mean investment is not needed."

Ahluwalia was responding to an internal audit conducted by NRCan on their research properties across Canada.

The regional property audit says capital reinvestment in buildings and for operations and maintenance is so "inadequate" there are long-term risks of major breakdowns, and the possible closure of some facilities. It states that ongoing research projects and data "could be jeopardized."

The Great Lakes Forestry Centre (GLFC) was mentioned in the cross-Canada snapshot of NRCan deficiencies in governance, decision-making and funding, but gave no details on specific problems at the institute.

The Canadian Press obtained the January report under the Access to Information Act, but the audit is now posted on the Natural Resources Canada website.

More than 40 people, including Ahluwalia, were interviewed in a survey and the audit team toured four facilities, including the 29-year-old Sault facility. The report's authors found strong consensus among regional managers that older buildings are starting to show their age, including "expensive problems related to some of their major systems."

Ahluwalia acknowledged there are systemic funding problems associated with aging research centres, but there are no plans to close down any part of the Sault facility.

"Because we've been taking money from other parts of the program to fund the physical infrastructure, there are probably parts of our research that we've not advanced as much as we'd like to have done."

He fully supports the report's recommendations that as much as $42.6 million in capital investment is needed for NRCan facilities, instead of the $7.7 million allocated for 2005-2006, and $2.7 million for both 2006-2007 and 2007-2008.

"We do the best we can, and by and large we're not doing that badly," says Ahluwalia. "We're certainly not doing as well as those who manage the facilities would like, but we're not in absolutely dire straits by any stretch."

He agrees with the report's findings that some locations are "cannabilizing" their buildings. At GLFC, some components are taken from underutilized space to repair other parts of the...