单选题 Any veteran nicotine addict will testify that fancy packaging plays no role in the decision to keep smoking. So, it is argued, stripping cartons of their branding will trigger no mass movement to quit.
But that isn't why the government—under pressure from cancer charities, health workers and the Labour party—has agreed to legislate for standardised packaging. The theory is that smoking should be stripped of any appeal to discourage new generations from starting in the first place. Plain packaging would be another step in the reclassification of cigarettes from inviting consumer products to narcotics (麻醉剂).
Naturally, the tobacco industry is violently opposed. No business likes to admit that it sells addictive poison as a lifestyle choice. That is why government has historically intervened, banning advertising, imposing health warnings and punitive (惩罚性的) duties. This approach has led over time to a fall in smoking with numbers having roughly halved since the 1970s. Evidence from Australia suggests plain packaging pushes society further along that road. Since tobacco is one of the biggest causes of premature death in the UK, a measure that tames the habit even by a fraction is worth trying.
So why has it taken so long? The Department of Health declared its intention to consider the move in November 2010 and consulted through 2012. But the plan was suspended in July 2013. It did not escape notice that a lobbying firm set up by Lynton Crosby, David Cameron's election campaign director, had previously acted for Philip Morris International. (The prime minister denied there was a connection between his new adviser's outside interests and the change in legislative programme.) In November 2013, after an unnecessary round of additional consultation, health minister Jane Ellison said the government was minded to proceed after all. Now we are told Members of Parliament (MPs) will have a free vote before parliament is dissolved in March.
Parliament has in fact already authorised the government to tame the tobacco trade. MPs voted overwhelmingly in favour of Labour amendments to the children and families bill last February that included the power to regulate for plain packaging. With sufficient will in Downing Street this would have been done already. But strength of will is the missing ingredient where Mr. Cameron and public health are concerned. His attitude to state intervention has looked confused ever since his bizarre 2006 lament (叹息) that chocolate oranges placed seductively at supermarket checkouts fueled obesity.
The government has moved reluctantly into a sensible public health policy, but with such obvious over-cautiousness that any political credit due belongs to the opposition. Without sustained external pressure it seems certain Mr. Cameron would still be hooked on the interests of big tobacco companies.

单选题 What do chain smokers think of cigarette packaging?______

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】由题干中的chain smokers和cigarette packaging定位到文章第一段第一句：Any veteran nicotine addict will testify that fancy packaging plays no role in the decision to keep smoking. 事实细节题。题干中的chain smokers和定位句中的veteran nicotine addict意思接近，都是指老烟枪，定位句指出“任何老烟枪都会证明花哨的包装对于决定是否继续吸炯不会造成影响”，由此可见，香烟的包装对于老烟枪们决定是否戒烟的影响很小，故答案为D。文中只有第一句话提到了老烟枪们对香烟包装的看法，A、B、C均不是他们的观点，故排除。

单选题 What has the UK government agreed to do concerning tobacco packaging?______

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】由题干中的the UK government和tobacco packaging定位到文章第二段第一句：But that isn't why the government—under pressure from cancer charities, health workers and the Labour party—has agreed to legislate for standardised packaging. 事实细节题。定位句指出“但这并不是政府——在癌症慈善机构、卫生工作者和工党的压力之下——同意对标准化包装进行立法的原因。”由此可知，政府已同意通过立法将香烟包装标准化，故答案为A。 B“去掉香烟盒上的所有广告”，首段最后一句提到去掉烟盒上的品牌不会引发大规模戒烟运动，这是一些人的观点，并非英国政府同意做的事情，因此该选项是对原文的曲解，故排除；C“为公司采用平装提供补贴”，原文并未提及这一点，故排除；D“根据包装重新归类香烟”，第二段最后一句提到平装是将香烟从诱人的消费品重新归类到麻醉剂所采取的另一步，而不是根据包装将香烟重新分类，故D与原文的表述不符，可以排除。

单选题 What has happened in Australia where plain packaging is implemented?______

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】根据题干中的Australia，和plain packaging定位到文章第三段第五句：Evidence from Australia suggests plain packaging pushes society further along that road. 推理判断题。定位句的前一句指出，禁止香烟广告、发出健康警告、税收等措施已使英国的吸烟人数自20世纪70年代以来大约减少了一半，定位句中的along that road是指吸烟人数下降，further一词表明平装让澳大利亚的吸烟人数下降得比英国还要多，故答案为B。 A“吸烟导致的过早死亡率已下降”，原文第三段最后一句提到由于烟草是导致英国人过早死亡的最大原因之一，甚至只能稍微抑制该习惯的举措都值得尝试。这是英国愿意尝试平装的原因，和澳大利亚无关，故排除；C“香烟替代品的销量大增”，文中没有提到香烟的替代品，可以排除；D“香烟销量下降得比英国更快”，文中也没有提到香烟销量下降，可以排除。

单选题 Why has it taken so long for the UK government to consider plain packaging?______

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】由题干中的Why has it taken so long定位到文章第四段第二至四句：The Department of Health declared its intention to consider the move in November 2010 and consulted through 2012. But the plan was suspended in July 2013. It did not escape notice that a lobbying firm set up by Lynton Crosby, David Cameron's election campaign director, had previously acted for Philip Morris International. 推理判断题。第四段第二句提到卫生部于2010年11月宣布要考虑平装并在整个2012年期间一直协商，这表明英国政府花费了漫长的时间考虑平装。紧接着在第三句和第四句指出了原因，采用平装的计划于2013年7月被搁置，并且戴维·卡梅伦的竞选主管林顿·克罗斯比创立的一家游说公司以前曾代理过菲利普·莫里斯国际公司，由此可知卡梅伦首相对于采用平装并不情愿，故答案为A。 B“来自老烟枪的强烈反对”，文章第三段第一句提到强烈反对平装的是烟草行业，而不是老烟枪，故B与原文表述不符，可以排除；C“许多议会议员有烟瘾”，原文并未提及议员们是否有烟瘾，可以排除；D“来自烟草制造商的压力依旧巨大”，原文并未提及烟草制造商给英国政府施加了巨大的压力，可以排除。

单选题 What did Cameron say about chocolate oranges at supermarket checkouts?______

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】由题干中的chocolate oranges at supermarket checkouts定位到文章第五段最后一句：His attitude to state intervention has looked confused ever since his bizarre 2006 lament (叹息) that chocolate oranges placed seductively at supermarket checkouts fueled obesity. 事实细节题。定位句指出，卡梅伦先生在2006年非常奇怪地叹息道，极具诱惑性地摆放在超市收银台上的桔子巧克力加剧了肥胖，由此可知，卡梅伦认为超市收银台上的桔子巧克力让更多的英国人变胖，故答案为C。 A“它们引起了众多争议”，原文并未提及这一点，可以排除；B“它们吸引了许多烟民”，原文是指桔子巧克力的摆放非常吸引人，但并未指出吸引了许多烟民，故B与原文表述不符，可以排除；D“它们缺失部分原料”，在定位句的前一句提到了missing ingredient，但是指卡梅伦先生和公共卫生方面欠缺的是意志力，和桔子巧克力无关，故D可以排除。