2. 外语
  3. After three hundred years of union, Scots are to be given the chance to vote for independence. The offer of a legally-binding re

After three hundred years of union, Scots are to be given the chance to vote for independence. The offer of a legally-binding re

admin2014-07-20  28
问题     After three hundred years of union, Scots are to be given the chance to vote for independence. The offer of a legally-binding referendum, probably in 2014, comes from David Cameron, who is not just prime minister of the United Kingdom but also leader of an organization formally known as the Conservative and Unionist Party. It is more than a remarkable concession. Since the Scots may indeed plump for independence, it is also quite a risk.
    Mr. Cameron’s move has not, however, been met with overwhelming gratitude in Scotland. Widely described as a " Westminster Eton toff" north of the border, he is suspected of setting a trap by trying to bounce Scotland into a vote on terms that would tip the balance in the union’s favor.
    Mr. Cameron wants a straight in-or-out question. Alex Salmond, Scotland’s first minister and leader of the Scottish National Party (SNP), which dominates the legislature in Edinburgh, is not so sure. He has said he favors a simple question. But he also points out there is a powerful view in Scotland that the country ought to be given more powers, taking it just to the brink of independence—"devolution max" , as it is known. Perhaps the referendum should reflect this view by offering three choices. Or perhaps two questions should be asked at the same time; whether Scotland should become independent, and whether it should acquire more powers.
    It is easy to see why the nationalists are keen to muddy the clear Scottish waters. Polls suggest that Scots are keener on more power than on outright independence. Give them three options, and the unionist vote could split, possibly producing a plurality for independence. Whatever the result of the vote, Scotland would surely end up with more powers. The SNP would have delivered something to its nationalist supporters.
    But anything other than a straight in-or-out question may result in a damaging quarrel. What if, in a three-part question, independence wins—but with only 35% of the vote? What if 51% of Scots vote for independence, but, in a second question, 80% vote for more powers? Nationalists would interpret that as consent for independence. But Westminster could fairly argue that Scots apparently prefer further devolution to outright independence.
    A simple question also makes for straightforward campaigning. The Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties would have to explain why union is good for Scotland—something they have so far done poorly, which is one reason they are in headlong retreat north of the border. The SNP, for its part, would have to explain the problem to which independence is the solution—which they haven’t done either. And if the Scots turn down independence, they can later be asked if they want more devolution.
    Mr. Cameron’s question, then, is the right one. And he should have a say on the referendum’s terms. Divorces affect both partners. Scottish independence would have mighty consequences for Britain, raising questions from how to settle the two nations’ fiscal accounts to where the Royal Navy’s nuclear submarines should be parked, if not in Scotland’s deep lochs.
The author’s attitude towards the nationalists is
选项 A、skeptical.
B、supportive.
C、disapproving.
D、indifferent.
答案C
解析 态度题。由the nationalists定位至第四段首句，句中muddy意为“搅浑”，接着作者分析民族主义者搅浑水的原因，之后从第五段首句可见作者认为第三段提及的卡梅伦的想法正确，而民族主义者的代表Alex Salmond的观点有问题，故C为答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/mGxMFFFM
0

专业英语四级

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)