1) 管弦乐队队员都已各就各位, 等待着指挥. (in position)
2) 世界是何时开始存在的? (come into being)
3) 现今人们越来越依赖计算机协助工作.(rely on)
5) 我将尽一切努力准时到达.(make an effort)
Chickens slaughtered in the United States, officials in Brussels claim, are not fit to grace European tables. No, say the American: our fowl are fine, we simply clean them in a different way. These days, it is differences in national regulations, far more than tariffs, that put sand in the wheels of trade between rich countries. It is not just farmers who are complaining. An electric razor that meets the European Union's safety standards must be approved by American testers before it can be sold in the United States, and an American-made dialysis machine needs the EU's approval before is hits the market in Europe.
As it happens, a razor that is safe in Europe is unlikely to electrocute Americans. So, ask businesses on both sides of the Atlantic, why have two lots of tests where one would do? Politicians agree, in principle, so America and the EU have been trying to reach a deal which would eliminate the need to double-test many products. They hope to finish in time for a trade summit between America and the EU on May 28th. Although negotiators are optimistic, the details are complex enough that they may be hard-pressed to get a deal at all.
Why? One difficulty is to construct the agreements. The Americans would happily reach one accord on standards for medical devices and them hammer out different pacts covering, say, electronic goods and drug manufacturing. The EU -- following fine continental traditions -- wants agreement on general principles, which could be applied to many types of products and perhaps extended to other countries.
Next Year Marks the EU's 50th Anniversary of the Treaty
After a period of introversion and stunned self-disbelief, continental European governments will recover their enthusiasm for pan-European institution-building in 2007. Whether the European public will welcome a return to what voters in two countries had rejected so short a time before is another matter.
The coming year also marks a particular point in a political cycle so regular that it almost seems to amount to a natural law. Every four or five years, European countries take a large stride towards further integration by signing a new treaty: the Maastricht treaty in 1992, the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997, the Treaty of Nice in 2001. And in 2005 they were supposed to ratify a European constitution, laying the ground for yet more integration—until the calm rhythm was rudely shattered by French and Dutch voters. But the political impetus to sign something every four or five years has only been interrupted, not immobilised, by this setback.
In 2007 the European Union marks the 50th anniversary of another treaty—the Treaty of Rome, its founding charter. Government leaders have already agreed to celebrate it ceremoniously, restating their commitment to “ever closer union” and the basic ideals of European unity. By itself, and in normal circumstances, the EU’s 50th-birthday greeting to itself would be fairly meaningless, a routine expression of European good fellowship. But it does not take a Machiavelli to spot that once governments have signed the declaration (and it seems unlikely anyone would be so uncollegiate as to veto it) they will already be halfway towards committing themselves to a new treaty. All that will be necessary will be to incorporate the 50th-anniversary declaration into a new treaty containing a number of institutional and other reforms extracted from the failed attempt at constitution-building and—hey presto—a new quasi-constitution will be ready.
According to the German government—which holds the EU’s agenda-setting presidency during the first half of 2007—there will be a new draft of a slimmed-down constitution ready by the middle of the year, perhaps to put to voters, perhaps not. There would then be a couple of years in which it will be discussed, approved by parliaments and, perhaps, put to voters if that is deemed unavoidable. Then, according to bureaucratic planners in Brussels and Berlin, blithely ignoring the possibility of public rejection, the whole thing will be signed, sealed and a new constitution delivered in 2009-10. Europe will be nicely back on schedule. Its four-to-five-year cycle of integration will have missed only one beat.
The upshot is that the politics of the three large continental countries, bureaucratic momentum and the economics of recovery will all be aligned to give a push towards integration in 2007. That does not mean the momentum will be irresistible or even popular. The British government, for one, will almost certainly not want to go with the flow, beginning yet another chapter in the long history of confrontation between Britain and the rest of Europe. More important, the voters will want a say. They rejected the constitution in 2005. It would be foolish to assume they will accept it after 2007 just as a result of an artful bit of tinkering
TRUE if the statement agrees with the information
FALSE if the statement contradicts the information
NOT GIVEN if there is no information on this
1.After years’ introspection and mistrust, continental European governments will resurrect their enthusiasm for more integration in 2007.
2. The European consitution was officially approved in 2005 in spite of the oppositon of French and Dutch voters.
3. The Treaty of Rome , which is considered as the fundamental charter of the European Union, was signed in 1957.
4.It is very unlikely that European countries will sign the declaration at the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome.
5.French government will hold the EU’s presidency and lay down the agenda during the first half of 2008.
6.For a long time in hisotry, there has been confrontation between Britain and the rest of European countries.