首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Even by David Cameron’s standards, it was a swift U-turn. First thing yesterday, Downing Street was still refusing to publish a
Even by David Cameron’s standards, it was a swift U-turn. First thing yesterday, Downing Street was still refusing to publish a
admin
2016-10-24
57
问题
Even by David Cameron’s standards, it was a swift U-turn. First thing yesterday, Downing Street was still refusing to publish a list of the significant donors to the Conservative Party who had dined at No 10. By mid-morning, the Prime Minister had bowed to the pressure of the inevitable.and details of four dinners were duly released. Quite right, too.
Mr. Cameron claims to want to lead the most transparent and open government in the world. But the reality has been all too different, the most substantial progress is made only when the Prime Minister has a gun to his head.
Rules ensuring that ministers log all meetings with media executives, for example, were only put in place after the uproar over phone hacking had claimed the News of the World and led to the creation of the Leveson Inquiry. Given that the cozy relations between Government and media would unavoidably feature in the hearings, Mr. Cameron’s move was less a sign of a heartfelt commitment to openness than a pre-emptive strike(预防性打击).
Similarly, proposals to set up a register of lobbyists had all but stalled until this newspaper’s investigation revealed Bell Pottinger executives soliciting for business from a repressive government, boasting about their links with the Conservative high command and claiming that clients’ "messages" would get through to top advisers.
And it is only now—in an attempt to head off the scandal over Peter Crudda’s crude selling of access and influence—that Mr. Cameron has grudgingly revealed his dinner dates with major benefactors and set out rules that ministers meeting with party donors must report any discussions of policy to their Permanent Secretaries.
Mr. Cameron’s ill-judged uncommunicativeness alone would have added to suspicions of impropriety. But it is his supporters’ efforts to explain his reluctance——with false distinctions between public and private dinners, between meals and that take place in Downing Street or elsewhere, between public and private dinners, between those at Mr. Cameron’s expense and those not—that really make the case for complete openness in all matters relating to access to the Prime Minister.
A central claim is that the Downing Street flat is a private home and that any activities there should therefore be inviolable. The assertion is a ridiculous one. The flat is the residence of the British Prime Minister. It cannot be argued that simply because food is served upstairs rather than downstairs there is no cause for concern.
Quite the reverse, in fact. So long as large sums of money are changing hands, the implication of influence bought is unavoidable;even more so, if the meetings are informal. Indeed, the two-step over Mr. Cameron’s supper companions has only added to the sense of government-by-inner-group, of a blurred world of friendship and influence accessible to those with money to pay. It is up to the Prime Minister to dispel such damaging impressions forthwith.
Ultimately, there is but one remedy: take the big money out of politics. Previous attempts to cap donations have fallen foul of the three main parties’ inability to agree. But the Cruddas scandal may yet tip the balance, and Francis Maude, a senior Tory minister, yesterday announced plans for quick cross-party talks on reform.
In the meantime, it is obligatory upon Mr. Cameron to establish an immediate policy of absolute transparency. That means not simply a list of dinners with donors. It means every engagement of any kind must be put into the public domain. The sacrifice of his personal privacy is a small price to pay to guarantee the incorruptibility of the highest office of the land.
It can be inferred from the passage that
选项
A、dining with the Prime Minister is a risk to take
B、meeting with famous people should be planned in advance
C、the activities of public figures should be monitored by the public
D、a swift U-turn strategy is of significance to the Conservative Party
答案
C
解析
根据短文可以推断,公众人物的活动应该受到公众的监督。最后一段提到,公众人物的任何一次约会都必须在公众的视野当中。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/x3GO777K
0
考博英语
相关试题推荐
Readingbooksisahabitthatispopularly【C1】______bymoreandmorepeople.Itbenefitsourlivesbyimprovingourknowledgeto
Readingbooksisahabitthatispopularly【C1】______bymoreandmorepeople.Itbenefitsourlivesbyimprovingourknowledgeto
OnlyGermany,withincentivestobusinesstoencouragetheemploymentofolderpeople,andFrance,withtheintroductionoflegi
Chooseoneappropriatewordfromthefollowingwordbanktofillintheblanksnumberedfrom1to15inthepassagebelow.Chang
Signhasbecomeascientifichotbutton.Onlyinthepast20yearshavespecialistsinlanguagestudyrealizedthatsignedlangu
Despitethefactthattodayvirusareknowntocausecancerinanimalsandinplants,thereexistsagreatreluctancetoaccept
Thepioneersoftheteachingofscienceimaginedthatitsintroductionintoeducationwouldremovetheconventionality,artifici
Thepolice_____toemergenciesinjustafewminuteswhentheaccidenthappened.
OnthemorningofSeptember11th,IboardedthetrainfromWashingtonHeightsinUpperManhattanjustasusualandwenttotheB
Inthewakeof11September,Visionics,aleadingmanufacturer,issuedafactsheetexplaininghowitstechnologycouldenhance
随机试题
发包人应在监理人收到进度付款申请单后的()天内,将进度应付款支付给承包人。
A.骨筋膜室综合征B.肾挫伤C.脂肪栓塞D.出血性休克E.骨化性肌炎(损伤性骨化)(1994年)闭合性成人股骨干骨折可引起
维生素C注射液(抗坏血酸)临床上用于预防及治疗坏血病,并用于出血性鼻、肺、肾、子宫及其他器官的出血,肌注或静脉注射。处方:维生素C125gEDTA0.05g碳酸氢钠49gNaHS0
工程变更不能超出合同规定的工程范围。如果超过了这个范围,承包商()。
《测绘法》对未经批准,擅自建立相对独立的平面坐标系统的,设定了严格的法律责任,主要包括给予警告,责令改正,可以并处()罚款。
MFT50中的50表示()。
下列不属于国家出资企业、国家出资企业拥有实际控制权的境内外各级企业及其投资参股企业应当纳入产权登记范围的是()。
国内理论界一般认为金融市场功能是()。
甲公司20×2年度财务报告批准报出日为20×3年3月31日。20×2年12月27日甲公司销售一批新产品货款100万元,由于首次销售该产品,甲公司无法确认其退货可能性,合同表明购货方可在3个月内提出退货,20×3年2月10日购货方因该产品存在重大缺陷而退货,
若用冒泡排序方法对序列{10、14、26、29、41、52}从大到小排序,需要进行几次比较()。
最新回复
(
0
)