Industry and Technology Committee on Oct. 22nd, 2026

[Adam Chambers, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chambers.

Mr. Threadgill, I'm told that your connection has strengthened. It probably makes sense for us to hear from you before members ask questions so that they might have the opportunity to incorporate what you have to say into their lines of inquiry. If it works for you, sir, we'll give this another go.

I can afford you two and a half minutes, if you'd like to take that now to finish your introductory remarks.

[Tyler Threadgill]

Absolutely. I'll start over since I'm not sure where I cut out the first time.

Chair and members of the committee, thank you for having me. My name is Tyler Threadgill. I am vice-president and head of North American government affairs for the LKQ Corporation.

Our organization supports Bill C-267 because it creates a practical pathway to advance right to repair in Canada. We do, however, believe that the bill should be strengthened to include automotive repair within its scope.

The automotive sector has changed. Repair is no longer only about access to a physical part. It increasingly depends on software, diagnostic information, telematics, security credentials, calibration tools and vehicle-generated data. If those inputs are restricted, an independent repairer may have the part and the expertise but may still be unable to complete the job.

That is why we're asking the committee to support two focused amendments that explicitly name the automotive sector.

First, the bill should expressly include vehicle electronic systems, software, diagnostic, telematics and security systems within the definition of an electronic product.

Second, the framework should recognize that vehicle owners and their chosen repairers need reasonable access to the parts, tools, information, software, security credentials and data required for repairs on terms no less favourable than those available to the manufacturer-authorized repairers without technological or contractual barriers.

Canada has relied on the voluntary Canadian automotive service information standards, or CASIS, to support access to automotive repair information, but CASIS has not kept pace with today's automotive market and lacks the enforcement tools needed to guarantee meaningful access for independent repairers. That access is essential to preserving competition, consumer choice and affordable repair options.

These amendments do not try to turn Bill C-267 into a comprehensive automotive right to repair regime; however, because this is a framework bill, we believe it's important that automotive repair be considered from the outset.

Bill C-267 provides an opportunity to strengthen Canada's approach to right to repair. We encourage the committee to adopt these amendments and use this bill as the foundation for the comprehensive and enforceable right to repair framework that Canada needs.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I look forward to your questions. Hopefully I don't have any more Internet issues.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thanks very much, Mr. Threadgill.

Colleagues, we're going to continue with lines of questioning.

Mr. Ma, the floor is yours for six minutes.

[Michael Ma, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

My question will be for Mr. Plourde.

One of our principal objectives with Bill C-267 is to reduce long-term household expenses through more durable and repairable essential home appliances; however, stronger durability requirements may also increase upfront purchase prices.

From a consumer protection perspective, how should we balance these initial purchase prices against total lifetime ownership costs to ensure that Canadian households actually save money over time?

[Alexandre Plourde]

I understand your question. Manufacturers frequently use that argument and say that higher durability or repairability standards will drive up the price of appliances and that home appliances and electronic devices will cost more. That argument has come up in Quebec for many years with the passage of legislation on repairability. I'd say that remains to be seen. Will the purchase price really go up?

A new performance warranty recently came into effect in Quebec. As I mentioned, it mandates repairs for a period of three to six years, depending on the type of product. Retailers argue that this will lead to higher prices, and so forth. However, Quebec has had legislation for the past 50 years requiring any product purchased from a retailer to have a reasonable useful life.

We find the arguments put forward by manufacturers somewhat dubious, because the new legislation does not necessarily impose new requirements. Nevertheless, we have been told that prices will go up.

I would say that even if new repairability or durability standards were to result in higher purchase prices, on the ground, we at Option consommateurs see people who might pay less at the time of purchase but are forced to pay for costly repairs or buy a new item when the product stops working after two or three years. Ultimately, this does not serve consumers' long‑term interests. We have seen many consumers buying the so-called extended warranty, which is quite expensive and costs one-fifth or one-quarter of the product's price, simply because the buyer wants to have peace of mind in case the item stops working.

Thus, in my view, the so-called price increase, which, incidentally, has yet to be proven, is something people end up paying for indirectly anyway through other costs incurred over the long term.

[Michael Ma, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you.

Following up on that, should the national framework then take account of repair costs, replacement frequency and ongoing operating expenses when assessing affordability?

[Alexandre Plourde]

Yes, and I think that's very important because consumers save money every time a product's lifespan is extended by one year, and so it's clear that a long-term perspective is needed when enacting this kind of regulation. Taking the purchase cost for consumers alone into consideration does not factor the total costs they'll ultimately have to bear.

I'm not aware of any Canadian study in which this type of analysis has been carried out, but some studies in France and the United States have found that when the product lifespan is extended, consumers obviously end up replacing them less often and, as a result, spend less money. That's pretty obvious. It makes sense.

Indeed, that certainly needs to be part of the calculation.

[Michael Ma, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you.

Essential home appliances, the domestic infrastructure, if you will, maintain household quality of life. When a refrigerator or washing machine breaks down, the length of time that the appliance remains out of service can be just as consequential as the cost of repairing.

Based on your experience with consumer complaints, what are the principal barriers preventing Canadians from obtaining timely repairs and how should a national framework address those barriers to maximize appliance service uptime?

[Alexandre Plourde]

That's a very good question.

Our recommendations discuss the availability of parts and repair manuals. I think that indirectly, this requirement could go a long way toward reducing wait times. Indeed, there's a problem when it comes to the availability of repair technicians. At Option consommateurs, we often see cases where people want to have an item repaired, but face extremely long wait times when parts are not available. Often, it's virtually impossible for an independent repairer to obtain these parts.

As such, having strong standards that require manufacturers to make parts available for a reasonable period after a product is released would foster a more dynamic repair market and promote competition. It might even bring down repair costs. It would undoubtedly reduce wait times for consumers seeking repairs and would also lower one of the major barriers, which is often the cost of repair. Repairs can be extremely expensive. There is limited competition.

I therefore think standards on the availability of parts could greatly contribute indirectly to making repairs more accessible to consumers.

[Michael Ma, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you.

Bill C-267 seeks to improve transparency around product lifespan, durability and repairability. However, consumers often lack the technical expertise required to evaluate these characteristics before purchasing an appliance. What information should manufacturers be required to disclose at the point of sale to help Canadian householders make informed purchasing decisions and protect themselves against premature product obsolescence?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Mr. Plourde, please answer the question briefly.

[Alexandre Plourde]

We propose the introduction of a Canadian repairability index modelled on the one implemented in France. It would be a scale from 1 to 10 that would give consumers immediate access to information about whether the product they want to buy is durable and easily repairable.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Mr. Barsalou‑Duval, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Good afternoon, Mr. Plourde. Welcome to the committee meeting.

I'll start by saying that as you noted in your remarks, we're disappointed to see that the bill is essentially a statement of intent in which the minister has been asked to take action, but there are no requirements. The bill sketches out the direction, but lacks any real substance.

Obviously, I think the bill is well intentioned. However, you said that as things stand, you are having a hard time taking a position on the bill and saying whether you support it or not. Nevertheless, would you be willing to risk its passage as is? Can we assume that the measures taken by the minister would be more beneficial than detrimental to consumers?

Additionally, would there be a significant risk of encroachment on Quebec's jurisdiction?

[Alexandre Plourde]

For our part, we would really prefer to see concrete provisions added to the bill right now.

We have made several recommendations. I spoke to the availability of parts. Accordingly, we believe the best thing is to act now to supplement the Quebec framework, which we frequently use at Option consommateurs, and add mandatory provisions immediately. I think that would be the best approach. Unfortunately, at present, we're working only with broad guidelines. We don't know exactly what the outcome of these standards will be. We'd therefore like to see requirements for manufacturers to make replacement parts available and manuals available and to provide mandatory updates.

There is also the issue of product design, and that's a very interesting position at the federal level. I don't know if you've ever bought a new phone only to realize that your old charger doesn't work with the new phone. That's the kind of issue the federal government could address, and it could be included in the bill right now. The same goes for the repairability index.

Some issues can be addressed later, but why not act now and establish concrete standards?

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

We have representatives from the automotive industry, specifically from the automotive parts manufacturing sector joining us around the table today.

Do you support their call to include the automotive industry in the vision for repairability? I know this was done with the law that was passed in Quebec City, but I'd like to hear your opinion on this.

[Alexandre Plourde]

Absolutely.

If consumers can benefit from their repair shop having access to data, standard tools or any other form of access to the vehicle, then yes, we are fully in favour of that.

At Option consommateurs, we receive many calls from consumers experiencing all kinds of difficulties with their vehicles and so any measure that makes it easier for consumers to have their vehicles repaired is entirely appropriate.

Quebec legislation already imposes certain requirements on automakers. Quebec has already taken steps regarding access to vehicle data. Manufacturers are required to provide access to vehicle data, but even so, I think that if there are gaps in Quebec's framework, this is the ideal opportunity to address them and take action to make it easier for consumers to get their vehicles repaired.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Perfect. Thank you for your answers.

My main take-away is that for you, and you can confirm this with me, the top priority would be to ensure that the framework established, should the bill be passed, does not limit what is already in place in Quebec from a legal standpoint. Ideally, you're proposing something a bit more rigid in the current bill rather than just guidelines that leave it up to the minister's discretion to do as the minister pleases, which could lead them to cave in to lobbyists.

[Alexandre Plourde]

Exactly.

We would therefore like to see concrete measures, things that are important and urgent even for consumers, to promote product sustainability. Obviously, this should only serve as a baseline for the country, and not standards that take precedence over existing provincial consumer protection standards.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Willshire, in your opening remarks earlier, you mentioned that there is a great deal of frustration in the automotive industry and among the people you represent because they are having a hard time accessing information, particularly with regard to data sharing.

Mr. Plourde and others have said that requirements regarding data transmission are already in place, at least in Quebec. Has this necessarily meant that these requirements have addressed all the problems, or are there issues that persist? Furthermore, is there any benefit to extending these requirements to the rest of Canada?

[Derek Willshire]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

Absolutely. Quebec's Bill 29 was a step in the right direction. Has it solved all the problems? Absolutely not. Often, repairers bear the burden of taking these steps to gain access to information, and that's a challenge. I take every opportunity to say that this is not an issue of us against them; it is not the aftermarket against manufacturers. We need the manufacturers to continue to bring vehicles to market. We have nothing against technology. All we're asking for is much easier access to data so that the 492,000 jobs in the aftermarket sector can be preserved. There is nothing in what we're asking for or advocating that would jeopardize a single one of the 135,000 jobs on the manufacturers' side.

That said, again, Bill 29 is a great step in the right direction, but a car travels on roads and crosses borders. I think there is an opportunity today for the federal government to flesh all of this out a bit from a national perspective.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

You mentioned the importance of maintaining—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Unfortunately, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval, your time is up. You may ask your question in the next round.

Mr. Gill, the floor is yours, sir, for five minutes.

[Harb Gill, Conservative, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Plourde, I'm happy to hear you say that you're in favour of adding automobiles to this bill. The sponsor of the bill chose not to include them. Nevertheless, I'm hoping that we can amend it, with his permission, obviously.

Could you tell us what would change with this bill? What would consumers in Quebec get if this bill were passed as it is today that they were not getting, let's say, yesterday?