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 . School starting times in America vary from an average of 7:48 am in go-getting Mississippi to 8:31 am in late-rising Connecticut. According to a survey, only in two states — Alaska and Connecticut — do schools tend to start after 8.30 am, the earliest recommended by many medical organizations. That may soon change. On October 13th California’s governor signed a law which cuts 2.7 million of the state’s schoolchildren some slack, setting a limit on starting times of half past eight for high-schoolers and eight o'clock for middle schoolers, in the hope that pupils will benefit from the extra time in bed.
There is plenty of reason to think they will. During puberty (发育期), adolescents are more alert in the afternoon and require more sleep in the morning. A research finds that later school starting times are in line with improved attendance, less tardiness (迟延), less falling asleep in class, better grades. It is estimated that moving to a half-past eight start across the country would boost the economy by more than $80 billion within a decade.
In response to the evidence, school districts across the country have begun to move start times back, but California is the first state to take the leap. Parents and unions are often bitterly opposed. The California Teachers Association fiercely resisted the change, citing the financial burden on schools as they adjust to the new hours, as well as the burden on parents who work as laborers or in the service industry. Last year the former governor, Jerry Brown, refused similar legislation (立法), saying the decision should be left to school destricts.
Supporters argue that it is appropriate for the state to set a minimum health-and-welfare standard. Anthony Portanino, who introduced the legislation, believes evidence of the change’s benefits will soon win over opponents in rural areas. “There really is no significant reason not to do this,” he says, “other than an overwhelming resistance to change from adults.” Which is an attitude many teenagers will be wearily familiar with.
1. What is the purpose of the law California’s governor signed On October 13th?| A．To make sure students get enough sleep. |
| B．To reduce the financial burden on schools. |
| C．To ensure that parents go to work on time. |
| D．To relieve traffic pressure during rush hours. |
| A．Many medical organizations recommend school should start before 8:30am. |
| B．Moving start times forward benefits the country greatly in the long run. |
| C．Teachers are optimistic about the change which can relieve their burden. |
| D．Later school starting times make a difference to students’ performance. |
| A．Doubtful. | B．Supportive. | C．Unconcerned. | D．Opposed. |
3 . Parents usually teach their children how to cross the street safely by looking both ways for cars. But do they also teach them to put away their cell phones?
Texting while crossing the street will soon be forbidden in the city of Honolulu, Hawaii. Beginning on October 24, you could be fined from $15 to $99 if you step into a Honolulu street while looking at your phone. Honolulu is the first major U.S. city to forbid what is called "distracted (分心的) walking." It recently passed a law in a seven to two vote. The law says: "No pedestrian (行人) shall cross a street or highway while viewing a mobile electronic device (设备)." In other words, do not look at a screen when you cross the street or you could be fined.
The law’s creators hope it will lower the number of people hit and killed by cars in the city. Mayor Kirk Caldwell told Reuters news agency, "We hold the unfortunate distinction (区分) of being a major city with more pedestrians being hit in crosswalks, particularly our seniors (老年人), than almost any other city in the country."
The law includes all electronic devices with screens: cell phones, tablets, gaming devices, digital cameras and laptop computers. The law does permit an exception. Pedestrians may use such devices in the street to call emergency services and rescue workers, such as firefighters and police officers.
Pedestrian deaths have been increasing as the use of cell phones rises. The Governors Highway Safety Association says pedestrian deaths in the United States increased 25 percent between 2010 and 2015. That trend (趋势) continued in 2016 with the number of pedestrian deaths rising to almost 6000, 11% higher than in 2015.
If you still want to text while walking, you could avoid being fined in Honolulu (and be safer, in general) by using a voice-controlled digital assistant such as Siri or Google Assistant. Or you could just wait until you are again, safely, off the street.
1. What is the new law about in Honolulu, Hawaii?| A．Pedestrians must follow traffic rules while on the street. |
| B．Texting is not allowed while crossing the street. |
| C．Cell phones cannot be used for the sake of safety. |
| D．Ways to reduce deaths caused by traffic accidents. |
| A．He will be grounded. | B．His electronic device will be taken away. |
| C．He will receive a fine. | D．His identity will be made public online. |
| A．Only voice-controlled digital assistants can be used while walking. |
| B．Only police officers can use such devices when emergency arises. |
| C．Only one such device can be allowed to use when crossing the street. |
| D．Only in case of emergency can a pedestrian be allowed to use a cell phone . |
| A．To cut down on accidents caused by "distracted walking". |
| B．To make sure electronic devices will be properly used. |
| C．To make the city as safe as the other ones while walking. |
| D．To force parents to teach their children to walk with care . |
The center of American automobile innovation
In a bid to take production back to Detroit, Michigan lawmakers have introduced legislation that could make their state
“Michigan’s role in auto research and development is under attack from several states and countries which desire to take
If all four bills pass as
Lawmakers in Michigan clearly want to make the state ready for the commercial use of self-driving technology.
5 . About 60,000 Pacific Islanders worked as indentured labourers (签订契约的劳工）on Queensland’s sugar cane（甘蔗）fields between 1863 and 1903.They were mainly males, aged 9 to 30, transported to Australia by ship.Some came freely, wanting the new life promised to them, some were tricked, and some were kidnapped（绑架）.
The practice of kidnapping people for labour was called “blackbirding”.“Blackbird” was a term used instead of slave, because slavery was actually illegal.Britain had passed the Slavery Abolition Act in 1833 and as a British colony (殖民地）,Queensland had to follow the Act It is said that a third of Pacific Islanders who worked as indentured labourers were either kidnapped or tricked into coming to Australia.Indentured labour was really just another name for slavery.
Indentured labourers had to work for a required period of time,usually three years,to pay back their passage to Australia and then they could earn money as free labourers.It was hard, dirty work in the Queensland countryside.Most indentured labourers were badly treated, many returning to their homelands as soon as their indentured period was finished.A small number married into local communities and stayed.Free labourers were also badly treated on the cane fields, working for low pay and living in very poor conditions.
Then the Australian Government’s White Australia Policy forced Pacific Islanders to leave Australia.Even people who were born in Australia to Pacific Islander parents were driven out of the country due to their colour.If they didn’t leave voluntarily, they were rounded up and driven away forcibly between 1906 and 1908.This practice destroyed many families.Some of the people had lived in Australia most, if not all, of their lives.Only a few who had married Australians were allowed to stay.A few managed to hide and avoid being driven away.
1. What happened from 1863 to 1903?| A．Australians had a new life. |
| B．Many Australians were kidnapped. |
| C．Australia was in want of labourers. |
| D．Australia’s sugar industry began to slow down. |
| A．It was lawful before 1863. | B．It came to an end in 1833. |
| C．It was introduced by the British. | D．It replaced the word “blackbirding” . |
| A．To escape mistreatment. | B．To get a better-paid job. |
| C．To avoid being kidnapped. | D．To be involved in local communities. |
| A．Slaves for sugar | B．Laws in Australia |
| C．Pacific Islanders’ new home | D．Sugar cane industry's development |
6 . Home to 8.2 million people, 36 percent of whom were born outside the United State, New York, known as the Big Apple, is the biggest city in America. Nearly twenty times bigger than the capital, Washington DC, you might expect New York to be twenty times more dangerous, actually, it’s safer. Recent figures show that New York now has fewer crimes per 100,000 people than 193 other US cities. It's also healthier than it used to be. For example, the smoking rate has gone down from 21.5 percent a few years ago, to 16.9 percent today.
New Yorkers should be delighted, shouldn't they? In fact, many feel that New York is losing its identity. It used to be the city that never sleeps. These days it's the city that never smokes, drinks or does anything naughty (at least, not in public). The Big Apple is quickly turning into the Forbidden Apple.
If you decided to have a picnic in Central Park, you'd need to be careful—if you decided to feed the birds with your sandwich, you could be arrested. It's banned. In many countries a mobile phone going off in the cinema is annoying. In New York it's illegal. So is putting your bag on an empty seat in the subway. If you went to a bar for a drink and a cigarette, that would be OK, wouldn't it? Er ... no. You can't smoke in public in New York City. In fact, you can't smoke outdoors on the street or in parks either. The angry editor of Vanity Fair magazine, Gray don Carter, says, “Under New York City law it is acceptable to keep a gun in your place of work, but not an empty ashtray.” He should know. The police came to his office and took away his ashtray.
But not all of New York's citizens are complaining. Marcia Dugarry, seventy-two, said, "The city has changed for the better. If more cities had these laws, America would be a better place to live."
The new laws have helped turn the city into one of the healthiest—and most pleasant places to live in America—very different from its old image of a dirty and dangerous city. Its pavements are almost litter-free, its bars clean and its streets among America's safest. Not putting your bag on subway seats might be a small price to pay.
1. The author writes Paragraph 1 mainly to tell the reader that New York is________.| A．bigger than Washington D.C. | B．the best place in the world |
| C．safer and healthier | D．the most dangerous city |
| A．quite popular | B．not allowed in law | C．very impolite | D．quite common |
| A．Some of New York's new laws are not reasonable. |
| B．A gun is much easier to get than an ashtray. |
| C．The police had no right to take away his ashtray |
| D．there should be a law to keep guns away from people. |
| A．The writer supports them. | B．The writer is against them. |
| C．The writer is not interested in them. | D．The writer's attitude is not clear. |
7 . Pengci (碰瓷) has been a disgusting matter for a long time. When driving on a road, if you see an old man or woman walking by the road, you may be afraid that he or she will hit your car on purpose, and then ask you for much money. Even worse, it has been reported that a pupil saw an old woman fall onto the ground, so he walked over to help her. But she grabbed him and said she was pushed down by him. Then she tried to extort much money from the pupil’s parents.
What a shame! How to deal with it? Our authorities have taken aim at pengci.
On October 14, three top judicial (司法的) organs issued a guideline to clarify the application of the law in extortion cases involving deliberately fabricated (捏造的) accidents or similar happenings. The guideline was issued by the Ministry of Public Security, the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate. For the first time, authorities have defined the pengci trick, in which people pretend they have been harmed by another party and then ask that party for money or property as compensation.
The guideline stipulates (规定) punishment for the two main types of pengci-fraud and extortion. Criminals who intentionally or negligently cause harm to others while carrying out pengci tricks may be charged with the crimes of intentional homicide, intentional injury, negligently (疏忽地) causing others’ death or causing serious injury to others, the guideline said.
The guideline also stipulates that whoever deliberately causes a traffic accident and blackmails the victim, which meets the relating provisions (条款) of the Criminal Law, shall be punished as the crime of extortion by blackmail.
According to this guideline, we can avoid being extorted by ill persons and warm-hearted persons can help those who really need help.
1. What does the underlined word“extort”in Paragraph 1 refer to?| A．Threaten to get something illegally. | B．Earn something by working. |
| C．Ask somebody for something. | D．Give something for free |
| A．To protect old men and women. |
| B．To punish criminals seriously. |
| C．To help students do good deeds. |
| D．To clarify the application of the law in extortion cases. |
| A．All the criminals referred to in this passage shall be charged. |
| B．The guideline stipulates one who causes a traffic accident by chance shall be punished. |
| C．Those who play pengci tricks usually pretend to have been harmed. |
| D．If a man plays pengci tricks, he may be very poor. |
| A．Help cautiously when necessary. | B．Help without hesitation. |
| C．Look on nearby. | D．Call the police quickly. |
8 . 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. |
9 . Families will be rewarded for the first time for putting out less rubbish under new plans to significantly promote recycling, especially of valuable materials like glass.
The new plan for collecting waste in England will scrap fines (罚款) for putting plastic in the wrong recycling bin. Instead, families will be offered rewards for recycling more rubbish measured by a microchip (芯片) in the rubbish bin. Caroline Spelman, an Environment Secretary, said, “It is better to use a plan that offers people rewards, rather than punishing them. We want to help those people who want to do the right thing by reducing waste and recycling at home. This means making sure communities are getting the collection services they want and not punishing hard-working families who make mistakes by putting bins out on the wrong day or leaving the waste in the wrong recycling bin.”
Though the punishment for putting waste in the wrong recycling bin has been given up, plans to try and remove the unpopular twice-a-week bin collections have largely failed despite the efforts of Eric Pickles, a Communities Secretary. Although Mrs. Spelman made it clear that communities will be supported in efforts to increase the times of collections, and the Conservative Party will not force local authorities to return to weekly collections. Most communities expect the introduction of weekly rubbish collections, as this will solve some of the problems about environment.
“We will continue to help local communities develop local solutions to collecting and dealing with family waste and will work with communities to meet families’ reasonable expectations for weekly collections, particularly of smelly waste.” said Mrs. Spelman.
1. What will families be rewarded for in future?| A．Producing less rubbish. | B．Putting bins out on the right day. |
| C．Throwing rubbish into the bin. | D．Leaving rubbish in the wrong recycling bin. |
| A．reduce | B．remove | C．increase | D．pay |
| A．The Conservative Party refuses the weekly collection. |
| B．Both Rewards and punishment should be carried out. |
| C．Local solutions to collecting family waste will be stopped. |
| D．People will not be punished for putting rubbish wrongly. |
| A．Travel. | B．Literature. | C．Environment. | D．Medicine. |
10 . 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. |
