首页
登录
职称英语
Even by David Cameron’s standards, it was a swift U-turn. First thing yester
Even by David Cameron’s standards, it was a swift U-turn. First thing yester
游客
2025-04-06
30
管理
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] 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://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/4028584.html
相关试题推荐
Toourgreatdelight,yesterdaywereceiveda(n)______donationfromabenefactor
TheUKhaslongprideditselfonitsroadsafetystandards.Casualtyfigures
EvenbyDavidCameron’sstandards,itwasaswiftU-turn.Firstthingyester
EvenbyDavidCameron’sstandards,itwasaswiftU-turn.Firstthingyester
EvenbyDavidCameron’sstandards,itwasaswiftU-turn.Firstthingyester
TheinfluenceofthemoralstandardsofthehomeisevidentIfthereisnor
TheinfluenceofthemoralstandardsofthehomeisevidentIfthereisnor
TheinfluenceofthemoralstandardsofthehomeisevidentIfthereisnor
TheinfluenceofthemoralstandardsofthehomeisevidentIfthereisnor
Thereport______poorsafetystandardsfortheaccident.A、blamesB、chargesC、comp
随机试题
Asalways,IampleasedtobehereattheNationalPressClubformy(1)Spe
越来越多agrowingnumberof,moreandmore
"MomentofReckoning":U.S.CitiesBurnRecyclablesafterChinaBansImportsA)
[originaltext]W:Goodevening,everybody.(1)Anxietyhasnowsurpasseddepressio
Shewasgoodat______herideasinthedebate.A、puttingacrossB、puttingaside
商业银行将()和经营目标结合起来,是创造公共透明度、维护商业银行声誉的一个重
胎头吸引术牵引的时间不宜超过()。A.10分钟 B.15分钟 C.20分钟
在一次小组活动结束时,社会工作者鼓励组员发表参与小组活动的感受,讨论彼此在小组活
打造新型主流媒体聚力实现中国梦 互联网时代,几乎人们的每
为恶意和憎恨所局限的观察者,即使具有敏锐的观察力,也只能见到表面的东西;而只有当
最新回复
(
0
)