There are moments in advocacy when the door opens. Not fully. Not forever. But enough that an industry has to decide whether it is ready to walk through it.

Lesley Yates, AAAA Director of Government Relations and Advocacy
info@aaaa.com.au

For the independent automotive aftermarket, this is one of those moments.
The Federal Government has released its consultation paper on reforms to the Motor Vehicle Information Scheme – Australia’s Right to Repair law.
For those of us who spent years fighting to get this legislation in place, that matters. Because this is not a theoretical discussion. This is not a polite policy exercise sitting somewhere in Canberra, disconnected from the real world.
This is about whether our industry can access the information, tools, and systems we need to diagnose, service, and repair the vehicles Australians rely on every day.
It is about whether motorists can choose where they have their vehicle repaired. It is about whether competition remains real as vehicles become more connected, more software-driven, and more tightly controlled by manufacturers.
And it is about whether we use this reform window properly.
The Right to Repair law has already proven its value. The government’s own review confirmed what our industry has known for a long time: when independent repairers have fair access to repair information, they can compete. They can invest. They can say yes to customers instead of turning them away.
That is a significant achievement. But it is not the end of the story. Because access to repair information is not a static issue. It changes as vehicles change.
When we first fought for Right to Repair, the conversation was often framed around service manuals, wiring diagrams, technical service bulletins, and diagnostic procedures. Those things still matter. They matter enormously.
But today, the repair environment is more complex.
Information no longer moves in one straight line from a manufacturer’s portal to a workshop computer. It moves through scan tools, data aggregators, remote diagnostic providers, workshop management systems, calibration equipment, security gateways, electronic logbooks and, increasingly, connected vehicle systems.
That is why this next stage of reform is so important.
It is not enough for a manufacturer to say, “the information exists somewhere.” The real question is whether that information is available in a form that allows the repair ecosystem to function.
Can an accredited repairer get timely access to the information they are authorised to use? Can the data flow through the systems that independent repairers actually rely on?
That is the practical test for the next stage of Right to Repair: not just whether information technically exists, but whether independent repairers can access it in a way that is timely, usable, and commercially viable.
The consultation paper includes a number of reform proposals that go directly to these issues.
It considers electronic logbooks, access for intermediaries, safety and security information, hardware and tool availability, pricing, compliance, and enforcement.
These are not minor administrative matters. They are the next frontier of practical repair access.
Take electronic logbooks. A service record used to be a stamp in a book. Today, increasingly, it is a digital record controlled by the vehicle manufacturer. That might sound like a small change, but it has big implications.
If an independent workshop services a vehicle properly, but cannot update the digital service history, what message does that send to the customer? What does it do to perceived resale value? What does it do to confidence in warranty and servicing history?
The same is true for data intermediaries, tool providers, and remote diagnostic services. Modern workshops do not operate in isolation. We rely on a technical ecosystem. We use scan tools, information platforms, calibration support, diagnostic partners, and software systems which help translate complex vehicle data into practical repair solutions.
If the law only recognises the individual workshop at the end of the chain, it misses the way the aftermarket actually works. It also risks making the scheme commercially unworkable.
A small or medium-sized workshop cannot realistically subscribe to every OEM portal, learn every manufacturer system, maintain multiple logins, manage different payment models and absorb the downtime that comes with searching across disconnected platforms.
That is precisely why intermediaries matter. They are not a workaround. They are part of how our industry turns information access into practical repair capability.
That is why access for intermediaries is so important. Not because it is convenient. Not because it is nice to have. But because many repairers rely on these services to do their work efficiently, safely, and competitively.

A law designed to support repair access must reflect the real structure – and the real economics – of repair. Security information is more complex, and we should be honest about that.
Vehicle security matters. Theft prevention matters. Customer privacy matters. No responsible industry participant is arguing for open access to sensitive security functions without appropriate checks.
There will always need to be strong safeguards, proper accreditation, and confidence that the person seeking access is fit and proper. But security must not become a blanket reason to make legitimate repair access slow, uncertain or unworkable.
The task is to get the balance right: protect sensitive information while ensuring accredited, legitimate repairers can access what they need, when they are authorised to use it, in a process that works in the real world.
That is why enforcement matters. A law is only as strong as its practical operation. If information is too hard to find, too slow to obtain, too expensive to use, or bundled in ways that make access unrealistic, then the promise of Right to Repair is weakened.
The scheme must be clear. It must be enforceable. It must be responsive when problems emerge. Most importantly, it must keep pace with the vehicles our members are already seeing in their workshops.
The reform conversation is not about repairing the law because it has failed. It is about improving the law because it has worked.
It has worked well enough to prove the principle. Now we need to make sure it keeps working.
That means being practical. It means being specific. It means giving government real examples of where the scheme is operating well, where it is falling short, and where the next wave of vehicle technology will create new barriers if we do not act now.
This is where industry voice matters.
Advocacy does not work on slogans alone. It works when real businesses explain real problems. It works when a workshop can say: “This is the vehicle we could not repair. This is the information we could not access. This is the system that blocked us. This is what it cost the customer. This is how the law could fix it.”
That evidence matters.
Governments do not repair vehicles. Workshops do. Governments do not explain to a customer why their service history cannot be updated. Workshops do. Governments do not sit on hold trying to access a portal while a hoist is tied up and a customer is waiting. Workshops do.
So, when the door opens, our industry has to be ready to walk through it with evidence, clarity, and purpose.
At AAAA, we will be making a strong submission on behalf of the independent aftermarket. We will support reforms that make the scheme more practical, more modern, and more enforceable. We will push for recognition of the real repair ecosystem, including intermediaries, tool providers and data services. We will continue to argue for electronic logbook access, workable security information processes, fair pricing, better compliance and a serious pathway for future access to connected vehicle data.
Because the job is not finished.
Right to Repair was never just about one piece of legislation. It was about a principle: that vehicle owners should have choice, and that independent repairers should have a fair chance to compete.
That principle is just as important now as it was when the campaign began.
Perhaps more important: the vehicles are changing, the technology is changing, the barriers are changing – so, the law must change too.
The door is open. Not fully. Not forever. But enough.
Now we need to walk through it.

If you would like to offer your thoughts on this subject, please email advocacy@aaaa.com.au