CELPIP Reading Part 4 Practice Test: Right To Repair Law For Household Electronics

A bill before the provincial legislature would oblige companies selling phones, laptops and major household appliances to make spare parts, repair manuals and diagnostic software available to independent repair shops and consumers at a “fair and reasonable” price for at least seven years after a model is last sold. Proponents anticipate less electronic waste; opponents warn of security risks.

Marguerite Olsen, who has operated a small repair shop in Thunder Bay for eighteen years, considers the bill long overdue. She turns away perhaps a quarter of her customers, not because faults are complicated, but because parts are unobtainable or electronically “paired” to the original device. “A cracked screen or exhausted battery ought to be a forty-minute job. Instead, owners are told to buy anew. That’s a decision made on their behalf.”

Devin Khanna, spokesperson for electronics manufacturers, dismisses much of the bill as redundant: most manufacturers already operate authorized repair networks, and several sell parts directly. Publishing manuals does not trouble him, and he concedes that parts could be easier to locate. What his members resist is releasing diagnostic software capable of unlocking security features that safeguard banking and health information. “People rarely discard a phone because it can’t be fixed. They want the newest model,” he maintains.

Consumer economist Helen Ostrowski endorses the bill in principle while tempering expectations. Her research indicates that most phones are retired in working order, superseded by a better camera or more storage, and that if a repair costs half the price of a new device, many people still choose the new one. “The law removes an obstacle but not our appetite for novelty,” she observes. She would supplement it with a label rating each product’s repairability at the moment of purchase.

When the control board on Lucas Bergeron’s four-year-old dishwasher failed, the part was discontinued, and a technician quoted nearly the price of a new machine for a used board. The Sudbury father of three would gladly pay more upfront for an appliance he knew could be fixed. He bought a replacement, and the old one, otherwise flawless, still nags at him from a landfill.

I repair small appliances for a living, and Mr. Khanna’s arguments ring hollow to me. Manufacturers who praise repair while 6. Choose…making manuals publicselling components directlywithholding their diagnostic softwarerunning their own service networks want it both ways. As for security, Ms. Olsen has been fixing devices for 7. Choose…nearly two decadesabout forty minutesa quarter of a centuryat least seven years without, I suspect, a single customer’s data going astray; independent technicians live on their reputations.

Admittedly, Dr. Ostrowski is right that 8. Choose…pairing blocks many fixesrepair networks already existfixes cost half as muchnovelty, not breakdowns, drives most purchases, and no law will cure that. But her 9. Choose…longer parts guaranteerating at checkoutdirect parts salescap on repair prices would let shoppers reward durable designs, and manufacturers would soon notice which models sell. If this bill passes, fewer families like Mr. Bergeron’s will have to 10. Choose…scrap a sound machinewait weeks for a service callpay for a quick screen fixupgrade just for more storage. That alone outweighs the industry’s grumbling.