第六篇 Reform on the Road
Will the reform on the use of government cars really reduce office expenditure 1 this count? There are no reports 2 such an outcome although some local governments have moved in that direction.
Hangzhou government 3 its reform last month. Officials below the level of deputy bureau chief cannot use official trips for business trips.
Instead they get subsidies between 300 and 2,600 yuan a month according to their administrative rank. This reform is supposed to save the government the money involving in 4 a large number of cars.
Hangzhou in east China Zhejiang province is not the first to attempt 5 reform. Nanjing, capital of the neighboring Jiangsu province, did so five years ago, yet there is no report available of how much money the Nanjing government has saved 6 these measures. All that we know about is the fact 7 government officials get monthly subsidies for business.
The public have a fight to 8 for transparency on the results of such reform 9 it is taxpayers' money that is being spent. Transparency is needed because people are 10 about policy-makers making policy against their own interests.
Obviously, the subsidies are not based on work needs. Lower level officials usually travel 11 than high-ranking officials. Therefore, the impact of reform appears to be diluted.
Transparency alone can tell us 12 the reform measures have indeed reduced government transport expenditure. If there is no disclosure of amounts saved by the reform, the public may have reason to suspect that the reform is actually a poly 13 the income of officials in the form of a transport subsidy.
The way government cars are used needs to be reformed. The government spending on purchase of cars was 80 billion yuan in 2008, and use and maintenance amounts to around 300 billion yuan a year.
A study of ancient Chinese dynasties shows that the more reforms of the tax system, the heavier the taxes eventually 14 on subjects.
The only way to prevent this vicious cycles from happening with government car reform today is for the higher authorities to have a strict and 15 audit of local finance.
词汇
transparency n. 透明度disclosure n.透露，公开
vicious a. 循环论证的ploy n.计策，手段
练习
1. A) on B) in C) about D) to
2. A) indicates B) indicating C) indicated D) indicate
3. A) completed B) terminated C) launched D) finished
4. A) maintaining B) maintained C) maintenance D) maintain
5. A) such a B) as such C) such that D) such
6. A) by B) on C) through D) in
7. A) which B) whether C) in which D) that
8. A) providing B) offering C) supplying D) asking
9. A) because B) therefore C) because of D) thus
10. A) satisfied B) pleased C) skeptical D) confused
11, A) less B) more C) faster D) farther
12. A) how B) which C) that D) whether
13. A) increased B) to be increased C) to increase D) increase
14. A) levied B) taken C) consumed D) removed
15. A) opaque B) transparent C) obscure D) ambiguous
答案及题解
1. A on this account 或者on that account 的意思是为了这个缘故或者为了那个缘故，是固定搭配。
2. B indicating such an outcome 这个短语作为名词report 的定语出现，说明这个report 是什么样的，所以要用的不是谓语动词，而是一个作定语的分词，在indicating 和indicated 中应该选择主动语态的indicating。
3.C 从上下文的语境中我们可以看出，杭州政府启动了一项改革，从意义上来看，只有launch 符合要求，其他选项都是表示“结束”的意思。在这里，launch 表示“开始，启动”的意思
4. A involve in 后面应该跟动名词或者名词，C 选项中的maintenance 虽然是名词形式，但后面应该加of，所以只有A 是合适的选项。
5. A such 用作前置限定词时，其后通常跟a 及单数可数名词，表示“这样的、这种的、此类的”。Such that 表示“如此……以致……”。
6. A 介词by 表示通过某种方式，by these measures 是表示“通过这些措施”的意思。
7. D 引导同位语从句时用关系连词that。在本句中，that 引导的同位语从句具体解释了fact 的内容。
8. D ask for 有“索求”的意义，在这个句子中比较合适。其他选项provide，offer 和supply 都有“给予”的意义，用在这一语境中不成立。
9. A 两个小句之间是因果关系，because 引导的小句表示的是原因，而therefore 和thus都只能引导表示结果的小旬：because of 后面只能是名词或者名词性质的短语。
10.C 这句话说的是纳税人因为担心决策者做出有悖于他们利益的事而要求政策制定有透明度。satisfied 表示“满意的”，不符合原句意义上的要求，由于同样的原因，pleased指“高兴的”，以及confused“疑惑的”也不符合。
11.B 根据语境，作者的意思是低级的公务员比高级公务员出差更多，因此补贴办法是不合理的。
12.D whether 引导表示“是否”的宾语从句，that 引导表示陈述句的宾语从句。
13.C 不定式to increase 表示目的，“这项改革只是官员用车补的形式提高自己收入的一种手段”。
14.A levy 在这里是“征税”的意思。
15.B 原意是“严格而透明的监管”，因此“不透明的”、“模糊的”、“模棱两可的”都不符合要求。