Correct Answer: how far the province’s rent limit should reach
Passage Reference: The province has to choose whether its yearly rent limit should also cover those changes between tenants, and perhaps newly built buildings too.
Why this is correct: The province is deciding whether its yearly rent limit should also cover changes between tenants and new buildings. The whole editorial weighs how far that limit should go.
Tips: For a “mainly about” question, find the choice the government faces in the first paragraph. Every speaker and the paper’s own view come back to it.
Why the other options are wrong:
- whether landlords should pay for new elevators: An elevator comes up only as Madsen’s example of repair costs. Nobody debates who pays for new elevators.
- how to speed up hearings at the tribunal: The tribunal is where Balakrishnan sees evictions, but its speed is never discussed.
- why banks stopped lending for family homes: Crawley warns about loans for new rental towers, not family homes, and he says lenders would offer less, not that they stopped.
Correct Answer: Jaspreet Tiwari
Passage Reference: rent rules alone cannot add a single home if zoning still blocks fourplexes and low apartment buildings along main bus routes
Why this is correct: Jaspreet Tiwari is a city planner. Tiwari says rent rules alone cannot add a single home if zoning still blocks fourplexes and low apartment buildings.
Tips: Read each speaker’s main point. Ask whose point is about what stops new homes being built, not about protecting tenants or paying for repairs.
Why the other options are wrong:
- Octavia Balakrishnan: Octavia Balakrishnan wants stronger rent rules to stop evictions. She does not question what rent rules can do.
- Evander Crawley: Evander Crawley worries that caps on new towers will scare lenders. But the claim that rent rules alone cannot add homes comes from Tiwari.
- Lachlan Madsen: Lachlan Madsen talks about repair costs and operating grants, not about rent rules adding homes.
Correct Answer: tribunal files where landlords evicted to raise the rent
Passage Reference: argues that the jump between tenants drives many of the evictions she sees at the tribunal
Why this is correct: Balakrishnan argues that the rent jump between tenants drives many evictions she sees at the tribunal. Files showing landlords evicting in order to raise the rent would support her.
Tips: Find Balakrishnan’s reason for her view. The right choice is proof of the same cause she names.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a survey of builders who paused projects: Builders pausing projects would support Crawley’s worry that day-one caps could stop construction, not Balakrishnan’s point about evictions.
- a non-profit’s bill for elevator repairs: Elevator bills would support Madsen’s call for operating grants, not Balakrishnan’s claim.
- bus routes where fourplexes are still banned: Banned fourplexes along bus routes would support Tiwari’s zoning point, not Balakrishnan.
Correct Answer: new buildings would be exempt for fifteen years
Passage Reference: He suggests exempting new buildings for their first fifteen years so that construction keeps going.
Why this is correct: Crawley suggests exempting new buildings for their first fifteen years so that construction keeps going.
Tips: Crawley agrees with one thing and warns about another, then makes a suggestion. The blank matches his suggestion, so read it to the end.
Why the other options are wrong:
- every new tower would be capped from its first day: Crawley warns against capping rents from the first day. His proposal is the opposite.
- sitting tenants would lose their protection: Crawley agrees that sitting tenants deserve protection, so removing it is not what he proposes.
- lenders would set the rents in new buildings: Crawley says lenders may offer less money, but he never suggests that lenders set rents.
Correct Answer: argue that renter protection and new building go together
Passage Reference: Protection and construction should arrive in the same bill.
Why this is correct: The editorial recommends a limit between tenants, plus an exemption, zoning reform and grants that keep construction going. It ends by saying protection and construction should arrive in the same bill.
Tips: For a purpose question, read the final sentence of the editorial. It sums up what the paper wants readers to take away.
Why the other options are wrong:
- defend landlords who raise rents between tenants: The paper calls the jump between tenants the place “where the real harm lies”, so it does not defend it.
- call for an end to all rent limits: In the last paragraph, the paper wants the yearly limit extended, not ended.
- praise the tribunal for its speed with evictions: Notice that the paper never comments on how quickly the tribunal works.
Correct Answer: too high to treat as a business cost
Passage Reference: she wants fines for bad-faith evictions raised so high that landlords cannot treat them as a business cost
Why this is correct: Balakrishnan wants fines for bad-faith evictions raised so high that landlords cannot treat them as a business cost.
Tips: Find the sentence where Balakrishnan talks about fines. Read what she wants done with them, then match it in other words.
Why the other options are wrong:
- paid straight to the evicted tenant: Balakrishnan says nothing about who receives the fines. Her point is how high they are.
- decided by a judge in every case: Judges are never mentioned. She wants the fines raised.
- shared between the province and cities: Nothing in the passage says how fine money would be shared.
Correct Answer: would lend less for new rental towers
Passage Reference: warns that lenders will offer less money for new rental towers if their rents are capped from the first day
Why this is correct: Crawley warns that lenders will offer less money for new rental towers if their rents are capped from the first day.
Tips: Find Crawley’s warning about banks and read that sentence to the end. Then match it in your own words.
Why the other options are wrong:
- prefer condos to rental projects: Condos are never mentioned. Crawley’s warning is about less money for rental towers.
- charge landlords more for older units: Crawley talks about new towers, not older units or higher charges.
- would stop lending to non-profits: Non-profits come up only with Madsen. Crawley never says lenders would stop lending to them.
Correct Answer: a whole year’s surplus
Passage Reference: his group recently spent a whole year’s surplus on one elevator
Why this is correct: Madsen, who runs the non-profit, says his group recently spent a whole year’s surplus on one elevator.
Tips: The comment asks what the group spent on the elevator. Find Madsen’s example after the word “recently”.
Why the other options are wrong:
- half of its yearly rent: The passage gives the cost as a year’s surplus, not half of the rent.
- a ten-year repair fund: No ten-year repair fund is mentioned.
- its entire city grant: Madsen asks the province for operating grants. Nothing says the group had a city grant.
Correct Answer: fills with the same story every spring
Passage Reference: Every spring our letters page fills with the same story.
Why this is correct: Look at the first sentence. Every spring, the paper’s letters page fills with the same story about rent jumps between tenants.
Tips: The comment speaks to the paper about its letters page. Look at how the editorial begins.
Why the other options are wrong:
- prints letters from landlords only: The letters described come from tenants facing rent jumps, not only from landlords.
- was closed for the summer: Nothing says the letters page was closed.
- is written by the tenant lawyer: Balakrishnan speaks at a hearing. She does not write the letters page.
Correct Answer: operating grants for non-profits
Passage Reference: He backs wider limits only if the province offers operating grants to non-profits at the same time.
Why this is correct: Madsen backs wider limits only if the province offers operating grants to non-profits at the same time.
Tips: Madsen’s support comes with a condition marked by “only if”. The comment’s blank matches what he asks the province to offer.
Why the other options are wrong:
- a new tribunal for housing cases: A new tribunal is never proposed. The tribunal is only where Balakrishnan sees evictions.
- lower taxes on older buildings: Madsen talks about grants, not tax cuts.
- free elevator checks each year: The elevator is Madsen’s example of repair costs. He never asks for free checks.
