The idea that “housing crisis” equals “concreted meadows” is pure lobby talk。 The issue is not the need for more houses but， as always， where to put them。 Under lobby pressure， George Osborne favours rural new-build against urban renovation and renewal。 He favours out-of-town shopping sites against high streets。 This is not a free market but a biased one。 Rural towns and villages have grown and will always grow。 They do so best where building sticks to their edges and respects their character。 We do not ruin urban conservation areas。 Why ruin rural ones？
Development should be planned， not let rip。 After the Netherlands， Britain is Europe’s most crowded country。 Half a century of town and country planning has enabled it to retain an enviable rural coherence， while still permitting low-density urban living。 There is no doubt of the alternative—the corrupted landscapes of southern Portugal， Spain or Ireland。 Avoiding this rather than promoting it should unite the left and right of the political spectrum。
26。 Britain’s public sentiment about the countryside____
[A]didn’tstart till the Shakespearean age。
[B]has brought much benefit to the NHS。
[C]is fully backed by the royal family。
[D]is not well reflected in politics。
27。 According to Paragraph 2， the achievements of the National Trust are now being____
[A]gradually destroyed。
[B]effectively reinforced。
[C]largely overshadowed。
[D]properly protected。
28。 Which of the following can be inferred from Paragraph 3？
[A]Labour is under attack for opposing development。
[B]The Conservatives may abandon “off-plan” building。
[C]The Liberal Democrats are losing political influence。
[D]Ukip may gain from its support for rural conservation。
29。 The author holds that George Osborne’s preference____
[A]highlights his firm stand against lobby pressure。
[B]shows his disregard for the character of rural areas。
[C]stresses the necessity of easing the housing crisis。
[D]reveals a strong prejudice against urban areas。
30。 In the last paragraph， the author shows his appreciation of____
[A]the size of population in Britain。
[B]the political life in today’s Britain。
[C]the enviable urban lifestyle in Britain。
[D]the town-and-country planning in Britain。
Text 3
“There is one and only one social responsibility of business，” wrote Milton Friedman，a Nobel prize-winning economist “That is， to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits。” But even if you accept Fiedman’s premise and regard corporate social responsibility （CSR） policies as a waste of shareholders money，things may not be absolutely clear-cut.New research suggests that CSR may create monetary value for companies –at least when they are prosecuted for corruption。
The largest firms is America and Britain together spend more than $15 billion a year on CSR ， according to an estimate by EPG，a consulting firm ，This could add value to their businesses in three ways.First， consumers may take CSR spending as a “signal” that a company’s products are of high quality.Second， customers may be willing to buy a company’s products as an indirect way to donate to the good causes is helps。 And third， through a more diffuse “halo effect，” whereby its good deeds earn it greater consideration from consumers and others。
Previous studies on CSR have had trouble differentiating these effects because consumers can be affected by all three。 A recent study attempts to separate them by looking at bribery prosecutions under America’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act （FCPA）。 It argues that since prosecutors do not consume a company‘s products as part of their investigations， they could be influenced only by the halo effect。
The study found that， among prosecuted firms， those with the most comprehensiveCSR programmes tendedto getmore lenient penalties。 Their analysis ruled out the possibility that it was firms‘ political influence， rather than their CSR stand，that accounted for the leniency： Companies that contributed more to political campaigns did not receive lower fines。
In all， the study concludes that whereas prosecutors should only evaluate a case based on its merits， they do seen to influenced by a company’s record in CSR。 “We estimate that either eliminating a substantial labour-rights concern， such as child labour， or increasing corporate giving by about 20% results in fines that generally are 40% lower than the typical punishment for bribing foreign officials，” says one researcher。
