Even by David Cameron’s standards, it was a swift U-turn. First thing yester

游客2025-04-06 27

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. [br] The main message of the first two paragraphs is that

选项 A、Cameron’s government refused to make a change in its policy
B、Cameron’s government was forced to reveal the names of the dinners
C、Cameron had to consider under great pressure resigning from his post
D、Cameron had once been attacked by an assassin in his life

答案 A

解析头两段的主要信息是卡梅伦政府拒绝改变政策。第二段说，卡梅伦先生声称想要领导世界上最透明、最开明的政府。但事实则迥然不同，只有在首相把枪对准他的脑袋时，才会取得巨大的进展。

转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/4028582.html

相关试题推荐

随机试题

最新回复(0)

Even by David Cameron’s standards, it was a swift U-turn. First thing yester

TheUKhaslongprideditselfonitsroadsafetystandards.Casualtyfigures

TheUKhaslongprideditselfonitsroadsafetystandards.Casualtyfigures