The connection is actually obsolescence.
As I said, my father installed a dishwasher 50 years ago in his restaurant. His advice to me was to keep it running as long as I could, because it was the last of its kind. He said that, going forward, all dishwashers would be electronic and would need to be replaced every four or five years. His view was that the new electronic dishwashers wouldn't last any longer than that and would not be repairable for all sorts of reasons.
Our dishwasher is still there. It functions quite simply using a pump that distributes the hot and cold water and the detergent. The dishwasher is fine and works quite well even though it's antiquated. Quite the restaurant relic our dishwasher is.
My father was actually teaching me a lesson in cost-effectiveness and profitability. As a business owner, the way to improve your bottom line is by saving on equipment. The more you can save on your equipment—upgrading and repairing it to prolong its useful life as long as possible—the better it is for your bottom line.
It's a bit like that in agriculture. Equipment is very expensive and is usually what makes the difference when balancing revenue and expenditures.
I'm wondering whether it would be a good idea to consider a particular option under this bill. I'm talking about giving people in remote regions who don't have access to authorized repair centres access to certain repair services. What do you think?