Quebec wants to ban planned obsolescence

To better protect consumers and the environment, the Minister of Justice, Simon Jolin-Barrette, will soon tackle planned obsolescence by tabling a bill. In the process, he hopes to make Quebec the first province with a law against lemons, these cars that are always in the garage.

“It’s not normal that when you buy, say a washer or a dryer, after four years, it breaks, it doesn’t work anymore, and the consumer can’t get it fixed, that there isn’t parts available and having it repaired is almost more expensive than a new one. We have to fight against this model,” Minister Jolin-Barrette told me during a telephone interview.

Its objective is to protect Quebecers against “practices that cost them dearly and harm the environment” at a time when inflation and sustainable development make daily headlines.

Even if the existence of planned obsolescence is not unanimous, it is defined as the voluntary reduction of the life of a product, by its manufacturer, to accelerate its renewal. A polluting strategy that maximizes profits, in other words.

To lay out his bill, Simon Jolin-Barrette affirms that he was inspired by “best practices in the world”, that he consulted the Ministry of the Environment and that the Consumer Protection Office ( OPC) has been thinking about the issue for a few years. Everything suggests that the Consumer Protection Act would be amended to include new articles.

The content of the bill remains confidential for the moment, because elected officials must be the first to be informed. But we understand that all everyday consumer goods will be targeted, and not just electronics as seen in some countries.

“Quebec has always been a leader in consumer protection. We will remain. I’ll give you an example: we are thinking about universal chargers, confided Simon Jolin-Barrette. This is perhaps a measure that could be included in the bill. »

Ottawa already intends to do like the European Union and force manufacturers of electronic devices to adopt a universal model, we learned in the Freeland budget in March. Some consistency will be required.

Retailers would also have their share of responsibility. “Generally, no good should be programmed not to last. So we want to ban this practice. The manufacturer and the trader must be held responsible if this is the case”, indicates the minister. When we know how difficult it is to have the warranty honored by manufacturers and retailers who sometimes pass the buck, this desire seems difficult to put into practice.

Simon Jolin-Barrette also specifies that his bill could take up certain suggestions from the deputy and official opposition spokesperson for consumer protection, Marwah Rizqy.

The elected official had tabled Bill 195 in January, the purpose of which was to fight against planned obsolescence and to assert the right to repair property. The text suggested the imposition of a fine of up to $3 million on any company practicing “deliberately planned obsolescence”.

His bill proposed, among other things, to introduce a durability rating that would tell consumers the average lifespan of the goods they buy.

Marwah Rizqy also wanted to make spare parts, tools and repair services available at a reasonable price. That this is not self-evident for companies and that it is necessary to legislate so that it is possible to have a toaster or a telephone repaired is simply shameful. The right to repairability alone – already in force in a handful of American states^⁠1 – justifies a new law in Quebec.

Quebec could also force manufacturers to display a repairability index on their products, as is done in France.^⁠2 since 2021. Nine categories of products are subject to this obligation. This score out of 10 allows, in theory, to make more enlightened choices, provided that the evaluation is adequate, credible and reliable.

Minister Jolin-Barrette also wants to endow Quebec with an anti-lemon law to help motorists who have the misfortune to come across a new vehicle whose problems are recurring. It’s not too soon. This type of law has existed in all American states for a long time. It provides for the repurchase of the vehicle by the manufacturer when the dealer is unable to carry out the necessary repair after a certain time.

The CAA does not know what proportion of vehicles can be considered lemons. Some sources speak of 1%. Even if it is little, given the amount involved, it is necessary to imitate our neighbors to the south.

A good idea to follow France?

We cannot oppose all these virtuous principles that the future law of the Minister of Justice wants to defend. But it remains to be seen to what extent these new provisions will have real impacts on the lives of consumers and on the practices of manufacturers.

In France, the results are mixed to say the least, almost eight years after the entry into force of the law punishing the “crime of planned obsolescence”. This is punishable by a prison sentence of up to two years and a maximum fine of 300,000 euros.

so far, no manufacturer has been found guilty of such an offence.

Apple, Nintendo and Epson printers have been sued unsuccessfully by consumer and environmental groups. In the case of the iPhone 6, 6S, SE and 7 which performed less well after the update of the operating system, Apple agreed to pay a fine of 25 million euros, but due to deceptive marketing practices.

“This penalization of planned obsolescence practices has had the merit of making an impression and encouraging manufacturers to turn to more sustainable, modular and robust manufacturing and production practices”, observes the French association HOP (for Stop planned obsolescence) in a text published in mid-May¹.

But in practice, consumers have very little chance of condemning a company, because it is extremely difficult to prove the bad intentions of an industrialist and even to explain the cause of obsolescence, recognizes HOP. Sometimes obsolescence is beneficial to the consumer. ” How to establish with certainty that the practice does not pursue another, more laudable objective: to allow the proper functioning of another element or quite simply to lower the selling price of the product? asks HOP in another text².

In January, the magazine Point^⁠3 wondered what had happened with the creation in France of the crime of planned obsolescence, in 2015. His answer: “no conviction has taken place, for lack of a proven case”. That does not mean that the phenomenon does not exist, perhaps it is simply too difficult to prove, but one thing is certain, French law should not make manufacturers shudder with fear.

Point also writes that hundreds of thousands of meeting hours and millions of euros have been invested on a European scale in order to create a “product repairability index” which has not borne fruit. This “colossal task” has given “results that remain imperceptible”, because the lifespan of household appliances is either stable (large appliances) or slightly increasing (small ones).

“Planned obsolescence does not exist”, even added the deputy director of the circular economy department of the Environment and Energy Management Agency (ADEME), Raphaël Guastavi.

We cannot assume the consequences of planned anti-obsolescence legislation in Quebec before seeing the details. Above all, it will be necessary to know what means will be given to the Consumer Protection Office to enforce it.

Even if the intention is excellent, it is the result that counts.