1 . LONDON—England will join the growing list of places that don’t allow smoking in public buildings, taxis and other places that includes even Buckingham Palace with a strong law.
Pubs, clubs and restaurants will all be smoke-free places. Taxi drivers have been warned that they could be fined(罚款) 50 pounds, or about $100, if they are caught lighting up inside work taxis.
Experts say the bans have become unchangeable because of increasing health costs and public worry over second-hand smoke. Some of the strictest smoking bans are in some of the United States’ states, such as New York and Florida, which include bars and restaurants as smoke-free places.
Spain, Italy, Iran, Norway, Sweden, Singapore, South Africa, Uruguay and New Zealand have made laws to limit smoking. France banned smoking in many public places in February and cafes and restaurants will become non-smoking places next year. Finland will introduce a ban, too.
Bans are spreading among countries, and the World Health Organization supports them, but it said that by 2030 there will be “at least another two billion smokers in the world” and an expected decrease in male smokers “will be offset(抵消) by an increase in female smoking rates, especially in developing countries.”
In advance of the English ban, anti-smoking ads have coated bus stops and the government prepares to pay some money to help people give up smoking. The rest of Britain—Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland—already have smoking bans ready.
1. England does the following to ban smoking EXCEPT________.| A．introduce a ban | B．pay some money |
| C．reduce the health costs | D．put up anti-smoking ads |
| A．More places in Britain forbid smoking. |
| B．Taxis are smoking-free places in England. |
| C．People will be fined for smoking in public places. |
| D．A smoking ban must be put into use in England. |
| A．the smoking situation is still serious around the world |
| B．the number of smokers in Finland is not large at all |
| C．ads didn’t appear in England until the ban was started |
| D．Scotland will be one of the strictest anti-smoking places |
| A．doubtful | B．supportive |
| C．negative | D．indifferent (漠不关心的) |
2 . Bringing goods into the UK
You are allowed to bring some goods for personal use without paying tax or duty.
Arrivals from EU countries
You can bring goods from EU countries without being charged tax or duty if they are:
● transported by yourself; ● a gift or for personal use; ● bought with tax and duty included.
You can bring alcohol and tobacco from EU countries without restriction but an inquiry(调查) might be required depending on the amount of your goods.
Arrivals from outside the EU
You will be free of duty or tax on certain amounts of goods brought from outside the EU, as long as they are for your own use. Any goods that are beyond your allowance should be declared.
Alcohol & tobacco allowance:
| Type of goods | Cigarettes | Cigars | Tobacco | Beer | Wine(not sparkling wine) | Spirits | Alcoholic drinks |
| Amount | 200 | 50 | 250 grams | 16 litres | 4 litres | 1 litre | 2 litres |
Allowance for other goods:
The maximum value of other goods you can bring is £390. Any single item that is worth more than the allowance will be charged duty or tax on its full value.
The rate of duty or tax on items above the allowance is:
● 2.5% for goods worth up to £630;
● decided by the type of goods worth above £630 — check by calling the VAT, Customs.
Banned and restricted goods
Goods banned include:
● illegal drugs; ● offensive weapons; ● endangered animal and plant species;
● meat and dairy(乳制的) products from most non-EU countries.
Food and plant products restricted include:
● products containing pests and diseases; ● products grown outside the EU;
● products not for your own use.
1. Which of the following products from outside the EU has the largest duty-free allowance?| A．Beer. |
| B．Wine (not sparkling wine). |
| C．Spirits. |
| D．Alcoholic drinks. |
| A．£ 2.75 | B．£ 12.5 | C．£ 110 | D．£ 130 |
| A．A set of Russian dolls. |
| B．A bottle of French wine. |
| C．A brick of Japanese cheese. |
| D．A package of Spanish cigarettes. |
3 . Progressives often support diversity missions as a path to equality and a way to level the playing field. But all too often such policies are an insincere form of virtue-signaling that benefits only the most privileged and does little to help average people.
A pair of bills sponsored by Massachusetts state Senator Jason Lewis and House Speaker Pro Tempore Patricia Haddad, to ensure "gender equality" on boards and commissions, provide a case in point.
Haddad and Lewis are concerned that more than half the state-government board are less than 40 percent female. In order to ensure that elite women have more such opportunities, they have proposed imposing government quotas（配额）. If the bills become law, state boards and commissions will be required to set aside 50 percent of board seats for women by 2022.
The bills are similar to a measure recently adopted in California, which last year became the first state to require gender quotas for private companies. In signing the measure, California Governor Jerry Brown admitted that the law, which clearly classifies people on the basis of sex, is probably unconstitutional.
The US Supreme Court frowns on sex-based classifications unless they are designed to address an "important" policy interest. Because the California law applies to all boards, even where there is no history of prior discrimination, courts are likely to rule that the law violates the constitutional guarantee of "equal protection".
But are such government mandates even necessary? Female participation on corporate boards may not currently mirror the percentage of women in the general population, but so what?
The number of women on corporate boards has been steadily increasing without government interference. According to a study by Catalyst, between 2010 and 2015 the share of women on the boards of global corporations increased by 54 percent.
Requiring companies to make gender the primary qualification for board membership will inevitably lead to less experienced private sector boards. That is exactly what happened when Norway adopted a nationwide corporate gender quota.
Writing in The New Republic, Alice Lee notes that increasing the number of opportunities for board membership without increasing the pool of qualified women to serve on such boards has led to a "golden skirt "phenomenon, where the same elite women occupy multiple seats on a variety of boards.
Next time somebody pushes corporate quotas as a way to promote gender equity, remember that such policies are largely self-serving measures that make their sponsors feel good but do little to help average women.
1. The author believes that the bills sponsored by Lewis and Haddad will __________.| A．help little to reduce gender bias. |
| B．pose a threat to the state government. |
| C．raise women's position in politics. |
| D．greatly broaden career options. |
| A．the harm from absolute board decision. |
| B．the importance of constitutional guarantees. |
| C．the pressure on women in global corporations. |
| D．the needlessness of government interventions. |
| A．the underestimation of elite women's role |
| B．the objection to female participation on boards. |
| C．the entry of unqualified candidates into the board. |
| D．the growing tension between labor and management. |
| A．Women's need in employment should be considered. |
| B．Feasibility should be a prime concern in policy making. |
| C．Everyone should try hard to promote social justice. |
| D．Major social issues should be the focus of the government. |
4 . "What kind of rubbish are you?" This question has brought about complaints over the past months in Shanghai. On July 1st, 2019, the city introduced strict trash-sorting rules. Residents must divide this waste into four separate groups and throw it into specific public bins.
Shanghai is faced with an obvious environmental problem. It produces 9 million tons of rubbish a year, and the number is rising quickly. Like other cities in China, it has relied on trash pickers to pick out whatever can be reused. But as people get wealthier, fewer of them want to do such dirty work. The waste, meanwhile, just keeps piling up.
Many people appear to be bothered by the rules. Rubbish must be divided according to whether it is food, recyclable, dry or hazardous （有害的）, the differences among which can be complex and confusing. Some have complained that they must put food waste straight in the required public bin, forcing them to tear open plastic bags and throw it by hand. Most annoying is the short scheduled time for throwing trash, typically a couple of hours, morning and evening. This means that people all go at the same time and anyone can keep an eye on what is being thrown out; no one wants to look bad.
People who fail obey the rules could be hit with fines of up to 200 yuan. For repetitive violators, the city can add black marks to their credit records, making it harder for them to get bank loans or even buy train tickets. However, citizens support the idea of recycling in general and say a tough campaign is necessary. "Slowly people will get used to it," says Li Chongjin of Fudan University.
1. What is the purpose of the first paragraph?| A．To amuse the readers with a question |
| B．To introduce a hot topic about trash dividing |
| C．To present a social problem in Shanghai |
| D．To offer a way to deal with the complaints |
| A．trash-pickers | B．waste-throwers |
| C．law-makers | D．rule-breakers |
| A．Being forced to keep plastic bags open. |
| B．Being required to tell different kinds of rubbish apart |
| C．Being seriously punished for improper behavior |
| D．Being asked to throw trash at the short scheduled time. |
| A．Hopeful | B．Dissatisfied. |
| C．Doubtful. | D．Uncaring |
5 . Beijing's transportation commission released a new regulation on Wednesday banning passengers from eating or drinking on the subway in a move intended to create a more comfortable space for travelers. Uncivilized behavior, such as selling products or playing loud music, are also prohibited under the regulation.
It will be included in the passenger's credit record that if a passenger disobeys the rules, and the he could be forbidden from taking the subway in the future, the commission said. The commission also assigned special inspectors and supervisors to identify improper behavior on subway trains. Prohibitions against smoking electronic cigarettes and using fake tickets were also added to the rules.
Liu Daizong, China transport program director at the World Resources Institute, applauded the new measure and said that as an enclosed space, a subway car will be filled with odors if passengers are allowed to have food. "These easily cause arguments between passengers, but there was no basis for law enforcement（实施） officers to get involved before," he said.
In January, a woman named Wang caused heated discussion online after she was filmed eating snacks and spitting out the food debris onto the floor of a car on Beijing's Line 13.She was later found by netizens to be the same woman previously filmed eating chicken claws and spitting out bones in a Shanghai subway car. Netizens had dubbed her "chicken feet lady". Other passengers asked Wang to clean up her mess but she refused, leaving the food packages in the subway car when she got off.She was later controlled by police in Beijing on suspicion of disrupting public transport.
Han Yanni, a 26-year-old white collar worker in the finance industry in Beijing, said drinking water and bread is her daily routine on the subway, especially in the morning rush. "Except for onions or sunflower seeds, I can put up with most of the eating behaviors," she said. "Especially if they take a garbage bag for their trash."
1. Which statement is true according to the passage?| A．It is not prohibited that a man smokes electronic cigarettes on the subway. |
| B．If a person breaks the rule, he may lose the chance of taking the subway now. |
| C．A passenger may be supervised by someone when taking the subway in Beijing. |
| D．One can eat bread if he or she brings a garbage bag in Beijing subway. |
| A．an awful smell of food | B．food remains | C．used napkins | D．food package |
| A．She had spitted out all she had eaten in a Shanghai subway car. |
| B．She got away with what she had done in Shanghai. |
| C．She called herself “chicken feet lady”. |
| D．She had cleaned up the mess she had caused on Beijing’s line 13. |
6 . When your alarm clock rings and you drag yourself out of bed, you probably wonder: Why on earth does school have to start so early?
Fortunately, there is a new law to back you up—or better still, science. A law in California requires that public middle schools begin classes no earlier than 8:00 am and that high schools start no earlier than 8:30 am. The law will go into effect by July 1, 2022.
Starting school at 8:00 or 8:30 in the morning may not sound like a big change, but it could mean one more hour of sleep for students who used to start school at 7:30 or even earlier. “The effect of that one hour is something they will be feeling as 40-year-old adults,” Sumit Bhargava, a sleep expert at Stanford University, told The New York Times. He said that not having enough sleep can affect students’ mental health and increase the risk of fatness and diabetes.
In the short run, students’ school performances should improve almost immediately. Kyla Wahlstrom, a researcher at the University of Minnesota’s College of Education and Human Development, found that students who have enough sleep are more active in class and get better grades.
Some might say that urging students to go to bed earlier could have been a much easier solution than changing the school timetable across an entire state. But according to the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, teenagers go through biological changes when they enter adolescence, which makes it difficult for them to fall asleep before 11:00 pm. So when school starts at 8:00 or earlier, they can hardly get the ideal 8.5-9.5 hours of sleep that experts suggest they need to do their best in the daytime.
This is why when the new law came out, its author, Anthony Portantino, said, “Generations of children will come to appreciate this historic day and our governor for taking bold action.”
1. What does the first paragraph serve as?| A．A background. | B．An explanation. | C．An introduction. | D．A definition. |
| A．The new law is of lasting benefit to students. |
| B．Lack of sleep affects adults more than children. |
| C．Enough sleep guarantees students’ mental health. |
| D．The amount of sleep people need changes with age. |
| A．Less sleep easily makes for health problems. |
| B．California is pushing back school start times. |
| C．A law to start the school day later takes effect. |
| D．Teenagers’ biological changes affect their sleep patterns. |
7 . Texas has been one of the most restrictive gun-rights states in America.Thanks to a new law,however,the state will be one of the most relaxed,to the degree that police are discouraged from even asking about someone's guns. And if they do, they may not have much power to do anything if the person refuses to show a license.
To be sure, the law is strict in its own way,offering a model for regulation. Under the law, open-carry citizens have to be licensed, a process that includes safety and shooting tests. They also have to show no prior psychological problems, and they have to be at least 21 years old.
It is true that gun violence dropped sharply after restrictive laws were put in place in countries like Great Britain and Australia. However,the US public seems more interested than ever in weapons and the power they convey,despite gun control groups' concern over the increase of violence. Most states in America have steadily expanded gun rights since the end of a 10-year assault(攻击)weapons ban in 2004. Black Friday this year saw the biggest gun cache(贮存)ever purchased in one day.
Considering those trends,there's a heated debate about whether the new Texas law is a model piece of legislation(立法)for a changing America,or a walking disaster just begging for trouble. As the law doesn't provide any punishment for those who refuse to show a license to a police officer, critics fear that officers may find it tough to handle potentially deadly situations. After all, armed citizens will no longer be considered suspicious, even though a lot of people might be alarmed by the sight. Most police in Texas have been told to not engage gun carriers unless they are doing something questionable or appear drunk.
For sure,New Year's Day will be an exciting one for Texas gun owners. What's not yet known is how the rest of Texas will respond.
1. All of the following are required in the new Texas law for open carry EXCEPT| A．age limit |
| B．mental condition |
| C．online registration |
| D．gun-operating skills |
| A．The reason for putting forward the new Texas law. |
| B．The present situation of gun possession in America. |
| C．The impact of the assault weapons ban in 2004. |
| D．The inaction of the US government as to gun control. |
| A．Heavier workload for policemen. |
| B．Disrespect for officers. |
| C．Lack of trust among citizens. |
| D．Difficulty in crime prevention. |
| A．Negative. |
| B．Cautious. |
| C．Indifferent. |
| D．Approving. |
8 . New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has signed an order allowing online marriages, as many weddings are cancelled under lockdown restrictions.
From now on, people in the US state will be able to apply for marriage licences remotely and clerks allowed to conduct ceremonies online
Mr Cuomo joked that the decision meant there was now “no excuse” for couples not to tie the knot.
“You can do it by Zoom. Yes or no?” he said in his briefing on Saturday.
The decision comes after New York state extended lockdown measures until May 15. More than 13,000 people have died of coronavirus in New York city alone.
Social media reaction to the decision was mixed. Some questioned why couples would choose to hold weddings when their families and friends are unable to join them, or criticised the governor for not prioritising other decisions. But others pointed out that during a pandemic (流行病), marriage could offer practical benefits, such as allowing couples to share health insurance coverage.
New York isn’t the first place to turn to the internet to offer a legal solution. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) recently announced that citizens and residents would be allowed to get married online, after the justice ministry created a website for couples to submit required documents. A virtual ceremony, complete with a registrar and witnesses, can then take place. Similar measures have been introduced in the US state of Colorado, where couples are being allowed to apply for marriage licences online.
Meanwhile, one county in Ohio is allowing people to obtain marriage licences online in limited circumstances, such as when one of the partners is a health care worker, suffers from a serious illness or has health insurance issues.
1. Why was an order allowing online marriage signed by New York governor?| A．Because people preferred to apply for marriage license online. |
| B．Because under lockdown restrictions, many weddings can’t be held. |
| C．Because there was no excuse for couples not to get married. |
| D．Because it was new fashion to conduct wedding ceremonies virtually. |
| A．All people are in favor of the decision. |
| B．No one except young people likes the decision. |
| C．Not all people are for the decision. |
| D．All people are against the decision. |
| A．California. | B．Ohio. | C．Florida. | D．Colorado. |
| A．In New York all people can apply for marriage licenses online. |
| B．In Colorado all people can apply for marriage licenses online. |
| C．In Ohio all people can apply for marriage licenses online. |
| D．In New York state people have to stay home until May 15. |
9 . Lawmakers in Massachusetts have introduced a law that would ban children in the seventh grade or younger from playing tackle football（冲撞式橄榄球）.The Act for No Organized Head Impacts to Schoolchildren, or the NO HITS Act, was introduced last month in an effort to protect children’s heads from blows while at a particularly fragile age.
The bill, which would still allow flag or touch football to be played, would cause fines of up to $2,000 for each time the law is broken. People who frequently break the law, or those whose actions cause physical harm, would face bigger fines.
“It’s all about kids’ health and we have a number of studies that say that repeated contacts（接触） to the head are very bad for you and the younger that starts, the worse it is," said Rep. Paul A. Schmid III （D）,who introduced the bill with House Minority Leader Bradley Jones （R）.
According to a 2017 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, researchers examining 111 brains belonging to former NFL （National Football League） players found the brain disease Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy, or CTE, in 110 of them. The disease is associated with repeated head injuries, not just concussions（脑震荡）,and is generally found in athletes, retired soldiers and others with a history of repetitive brain injuries, according to the Concussion Legacy Foundation, a non—profit organization that works to study, treat and prevent future cases of brain injuries among athletes and other at—risk groups.
Similar laws have been considered elsewhere in the country, including California and Illinois last year, though they didn’t secure enough votes to become law. Those against previously proposed（提议的）bans have argued that adequate progress has been achieved to make the sport safer and that the sport offers too many benefits for children to totally avoid it.
Several former NFL players, who have been directly or indirectly affected by CTE, have argued differently, however. “I made the mistake of starting tackle football at 9 years old. Now, CTE has taken my life away.Y outh tackle football is all risk with no reward," Pro Football Hall of Famer Nick Buoniconti told CNN last year.
1. Why was the law introduced by lawmakers in Massachusetts?| A．To make tackle football safer for players. |
| B．To ban children from doing sports too young. |
| C．To encourage the popularity of some safe sports. |
| D．To keep young children from suffering brain injuries. |
| A．The reason why the sport is forbidden. |
| B．The consequences of breaking the new law. |
| C．The causes of the new law in Massachusetts. |
| D．The fines of playing tackle football incorrectly. |
| A．Future cases of brain injuries can be reduced. |
| B．NFL players used to pay much attention to CTE. |
| C．Repeated head blows can result in brain diseases. |
| D．Brain injuries can really be prevented with action. |
| A．Tackle football is less dangerous than people think. |
| B．Young children should avoid playing tackle football. |
| C．Tackle football should be made easier to play than before. |
| D．Young children often make mistakes while playing tackle football. |
10 . Hundreds of new drivers have been given bans (禁令) for using their mobile phones at the wheel, as part of stricter new laws introduced. In March, the punishment for driving while on the phone was doubled to six points — meaning drivers with less than two years’ experience faced a ban.
New laws meant the punishment for being caught on a mobile phone at the wheel was increased to six points. The new rules were introduced in England, Scotland and Wales. Drivers who get six points within two years of passing their test will lose their licence, creating a one-strike rule for mobile phone users. To get back behind the wheel, new drivers have to retake both the theory and practical parts of the driving test.
Mr Williams in the RAC said, “These people have spent hours and hours and hundreds of pounds learning to drive to gain their personal freedom only to throw it all away through this foolish behaviour. The only comfort is that they won’t be drawn into some terrible crashes caused by the distraction (使人分心的事物) of a hand-held mobile phone.”
When the new laws were introduced, Transport Secretary Chris Grayling said they would act as a strong warning to mobile phone users. However, the numbers suggested a total of 15,752 drivers received the punishment of six points for using a mobile phone between March and August. This is an increase from 15, 237 drivers in the same period of last year.
National Police Chiefs’ Council Lead on roads Policing, Chief Constable Anthony Bangham, said the police took the offence (违法行为) seriously. “This is not a small offence and is never a risk worth taking because a moment’s distraction behind the wheel can change lives forever.” “Our message is simple — don’t do it,” he added.
1. What can we infer from Paragraph1?| A．The new laws have not been passed. |
| B．The new laws are not strict enough. |
| C．Drivers with less than two years’ experience won’t be affected. |
| D．Punishment for driving while phoning used to be three points. |
| A．He will be fined a lot. |
| B．He must learn the new rules. |
| C．He will lose his driving licence. |
| D．He will be given a warning. |
| A．traffic accidents were cut down |
| B．there were still many drivers who broke them |
| C．drivers thought the laws were unfair to them |
| D．fewer people broke them compared |
| A．The police didn’t take the new rules seriously. |
| B．The roads policy should be improved for safety. |
| C．A moment of carelessness may cause big accidents. |
| D．The laws need to be improved a lot and retested. |
