Tips: Keep the speaker's own opinion apart from the warnings of each group in the report.

Why the other options are wrong:

• backfire on drivers who are not ready.: The warning that a one-size-fits-all rule could backfire comes from the opponents. The speaker's own warning is about public trust.
• raise the cost of driving for households.: The opening says the issue affects household transportation costs. But the speaker's own warning is about public trust. The issue matters because it affects jobs in places like Windsor and Oshawa, household transportation costs, and Canada's climate commitments.
• hold back new ideas in the industry.: Nobody warns that mandates hold back new ideas. Supporters say the opposite: mandates force innovation.

Correct Answer: handle cold climates better than EVs.

Why this is correct: The middle group suggests more support for plug-in hybrids. They give one reason: these cars perform better in cold climates.

Tips: When a group suggests something, listen for the reason they give for it.

Why the other options are wrong:

• cost less upfront than electric models.: Upfront cost comes from the critics' point about electric car prices. The middle group does not link hybrids to price.
• need less charging outside major cities.: Charging outside major cities is the auto executives' concern. The middle group does not give it as the reason for hybrids.
• create more jobs in Windsor and Oshawa.: Jobs in Windsor and Oshawa come from the introduction. Nobody says hybrids would create more jobs there.

Correct Answer: push car makers to come up with new ideas.

Why this is correct: The planner says that without firm targets, companies delay expensive changes. From this, the report concludes that mandates do not stifle innovation, they force it.

Tips: When someone is quoted, listen for the point the report draws from the quote.

Why the other options are wrong:

• give car makers certainty about the rules.: Certainty for car makers is the supporters' opening point. The planner's comment is about delay, and it leads to the point about innovation.
• bring thousands of jobs to new plants.: Thousands of jobs come from the investment announcements in Ontario and Quebec. The planner does not talk about jobs.
• cut a large share of national emissions.: The emissions point comes from Natural Resources Canada. It explains why shifting sales matters, and it is not what the planner said.

Correct Answer: focus on higher-end electric models.

Why this is correct: Critics say mandates could push car makers to focus on higher-end EVs to meet targets. This would leave buyers on a budget with fewer options.

Tips: Listen for what each group thinks car makers might do, and under what condition.

Why the other options are wrong:

• cut prices on their electric models.: The report says prices are slowly coming down. But nobody says car makers will cut prices to meet the targets.
• pass the cost of penalties on to buyers.: Critics do talk about penalties reaching buyers. But that happens if the targets are missed, not as a way to meet them.
• sell more plug-in hybrids instead.: Plug-in hybrids come from the middle group, who want more support for them. Critics do not talk about hybrids.

Correct Answer: respectful of them, while still backing the mandates.

Why this is correct: The speaker says, I see the merit in the concerns. The speaker still generally supports the mandates, with conditions.

Tips: Notice how the speaker treats other people's worries, and where the speaker stands on the policy.

Why the other options are wrong:

• respectful of them, and ready to drop the mandates.: The speaker respects the concerns but does not drop the mandates. The speaker says, I generally support EV mandates.
• dismissive of them, while still backing the mandates.: The speaker does back the mandates, but is not dismissive. The speaker says the concerns have merit.
• unsure about them, and unwilling to take a side.: The speaker does take a side. The speaker clearly supports the mandates if the conditions are met.

Correct Answer: had bought it that same winter, and its range dropped sharply.

Why this is correct: The neighbour bought the car last winter and struggled during a cold snap. So the trouble came in the same winter, when the range dropped sharply.

Tips: Think about what the time words in a personal story tell you.

Why the other options are wrong:

• had bought it the summer before, and its range dropped sharply.: The range did drop sharply. But the car was bought last winter, not the summer before.
• had owned it for several years, and its range dropped sharply.: The range did drop sharply. But the car was bought last winter, so it had not been owned for years.
• had bought it that same winter, and its battery would not charge.: The car was bought that winter. But the problem was the range dropping. Nobody says the battery would not charge.