2. 考研
  3. Clever, rich or both—almost every country in the world has some sort of programme to attract desirable migrants. The only except

Clever, rich or both—almost every country in the world has some sort of programme to attract desirable migrants. The only except

admin2010-06-17  89
问题     Clever, rich or both—almost every country in the world has some sort of programme to attract desirable migrants. The only exceptions are "weird places like Bhutan" says Christian Kalin of Henley & Partners, which specializes in fixing visas and passports for globe-trotters. Competition is fierce and, as with most things, that lowers the price and increases choice. Britain has two programmes, one for the rich—who have to invest ￡750,000($1.36m) in actively traded securities—and one, much larger, for talented foreigners.
    Both have worked well. Unlike some other countries, Britain does not make applicants find a job first: with good qualifications, they can just turn up and look for work. That helps keep Britain’s economy flexible and competitive. But now a bureaucratic snag is threatening the scheme.
    The problem comes with anyone wanting to convert his visa into "indefinite leave to remain" (Britain’s equivalent of America’s Green Card). This normally requires four years’ continuous residence in Britain. After a further year, it normally leads to British citizenship.
    The law defines continuous residence sensibly. Business trips and holidays don’t count, if the applicant’s main home is in Britain. As a rule of thumb, an average of 90 days abroad was allowed each year. But unpublished guidelines seen by The Economist are tougher: they say that "none of the absences abroad should be of more than three months, and they must not amount to more than six months in all." Over the four years needed to quality, that averages only six weeks a year.
    For many jet-setters, this restriction is a career-buster. Six weeks abroad barely covers holidays, let alone business travel. Alexei Sidney, a Russian consultant, has to turn down important jobs because he cannot afford any more days abroad. If applicants travel "too much", their children risk losing the right to remain in Britain.
    The Home Office insists that the rules have not changed since 2001. That would confirm Mr. Gherson’s suspicion that the new policy has come in by accident, probably as a result of zeal or carelessness by mid-ranking officials. Their attitude is at odds with the stance of the government, which has been trying for years to make the system more user-friendly for the world’s elite. It even moved processing of business residency cases from a huge office in Croydon, notorious for its slowness and hostility to would-be immigrants, to a new outfit in Sheffield.
    But lawyers such as Mr. Kalin are in no doubt of the risk Britain is running. America, he says, is already losing out in the global talent market because of its "painful and humiliating" immigration procedures. If Britain’s rules stay tight, he says, foreigners will go elsewhere. Likely beneficiaries are Ireland and Austria, European Union countries whose residency visas and passports confer the same convenience as British ones, with less hassle.
选项 A、is different from any other country in the world.
B、is not favorable for the immigrants.
C、works well in fixing visas and passports for global-trotters.
D、increases choices for immigrants.
答案B
解析 事实细节题。从第一段可以看出，这里讲的主要是移民政策。为讲述英国的移民政策，作者举例说明不丹的不利移民政策，因此选B，同时也可以排除C。引用的Christian Kalin的话"weird places like Bhutan", "Places"是复数形式，可以推出不丹的移民政策并不是和其他任何地方的都不同，因此A是错误的；D张冠李戴，是其他国家吸引移民的政策为移民提供了机会，而不是不丹的。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/se44777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)