Text4 Most forecasts suggest that Britain will be a poorer country afier Brexit,largely because trading with the European Union will become more difficult.Such predictions about the distant future are,by their nature,open to doubt,which is partly why Brex

Text4 Most forecasts suggest that Britain will be a poorer country afier Brexit,largely because trading with the European Union will become more difficult.Such predictions about the distant future are,by their nature,open to doubt,which is partly why Brexit's proponents feel free to dismiss them.But the same does not apply to a new paper by Meredith Crowley,Oliver Exton and Lu Han from Cambridge University,which suggests that,months before Brexit has even happened,trade is already suffering,as firms respond to the prospect of higher tariffs.More than 100,000 British businesses export goods to the EU each year.At present they enjoy tariff-free trade with the country's biggest export market.But all face uncertainty as Britain negotiates a new trading relationship with Brussels.Some fear disaster if the talks break down.British carmakers could face a l0%tanff to export to the EU market.Dairies might have to pay tariffs of more than 30%.These extra costs could make exporting uneconomic.The Cambridge paper looks at the exporting decisions of British firms,across 8,000 types of product,in response to the tariffs that Britain would face in the event of reaching no trade deal with the EU.Where necessary,they adjust their calculations to take account of exchange-rate fluctvations.Since the referendum many companies appear to have reduced their exports to the EU.The research suggests that the bigger the potential tariff facing a product,the more nervous:firms are about exporting it.Why risk producing for a market that could soon become unwelcoming?Overall,the number of companies that began exporting new products to the EU in 2016 would have been 5%higher if there had been a Remain vote,the paper finds.It is hard to know what those firms that decided against producing for the EU did instead.The research finds little evidence,however,that they have lived up to the hopes of Brexiteers and boosted their exports to fast-growing non-EU markets.Some may have tried to sell more within Britain.Businesses may have only temporarily scaled down their production of exports for the EU.Normal service could resume ifBritain negotiates a good trade deal.But some damage is already done.The paper's results imply that in 2016 Britain lost some~lbn（$1.3bn）of exports to the EU because of the mere threat of higher tariffs.The long-term impact will be greater.Some of the firms dissuaded from exporting would have turned into big beasts.The referendum was only halfway through 2016,and the paper does not analyse data after that year.Meanwhile,Brexit uncertainty continues to rise.
The author believes that the impact of Brexit uncertainty is______

A.enormous
B.obscure
C.fierce
D.controllable

Text4 Most forecasts suggest that Britain will be a poorer country afier Brexit,largely because trading with the European Union will become more difficult.Such predictions about the distant future are,by their nature,open to doubt,which is partly why Brexit's proponents feel free to dismiss them.But the same does not apply to a new paper by Meredith Crowley,Oliver Exton and Lu Han from Cambridge University,which suggests that,months before Brexit has even happened,trade is already suffering,as firms respond to the prospect of higher tariffs.More than 100,000 British businesses export goods to the EU each year.At present they enjoy tariff-free trade with the country's biggest export market.But all face uncertainty as Britain negotiates a new trading relationship with Brussels.Some fear disaster if the talks break down.British carmakers could face a l0%tanff to export to the EU market.Dairies might have to pay tariffs of more than 30%.These extra costs could make exporting uneconomic.The Cambridge paper looks at the exporting decisions of British firms,across 8,000 types of product,in response to the tariffs that Britain would face in the event of reaching no trade deal with the EU.Where necessary,they adjust their calculations to take account of exchange-rate fluctvations.Since the referendum many companies appear to have reduced their exports to the EU.The research suggests that the bigger the potential tariff facing a product,the more nervous:firms are about exporting it.Why risk producing for a market that could soon become unwelcoming?Overall,the number of companies that began exporting new products to the EU in 2016 would have been 5%higher if there had been a Remain vote,the paper finds.It is hard to know what those firms that decided against producing for the EU did instead.The research finds little evidence,however,that they have lived up to the hopes of Brexiteers and boosted their exports to fast-growing non-EU markets.Some may have tried to sell more within Britain.Businesses may have only temporarily scaled down their production of exports for the EU.Normal service could resume ifBritain negotiates a good trade deal.But some damage is already done.The paper's results imply that in 2016 Britain lost some~lbn（$1.3bn）of exports to the EU because of the mere threat of higher tariffs.The long-term impact will be greater.Some of the firms dissuaded from exporting would have turned into big beasts.The referendum was only halfway through 2016,and the paper does not analyse data after that year.Meanwhile,Brexit uncertainty continues to rise.
What's the main idea of the text?

A.Brexit uncertainry has already damaged Britain's exporters.
B.Measures to deal with the impact led by Brexit uncertainty.
C.British business export to EU has dramatically decreased.
D.Uncertaintv means more export tariffs to a large extent.

资料：Seeking to end a stalemate in negotiations over her country’s withdrawal from the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain offered Friday substantial payments to the bloc during a two-year transition period immediately after the country’s exit.
　　Mrs. May’s long-awaited intervention, during a speech in Florence, Italy, was being watched closely in capitals on the Continent and in London, where members of her cabinet have been fiercely divided over Britain’s tortuous divorce from the bloc. The speech aimed to open the way to serious negotiations on what is commonly known as Brexit, and to a broader and more productive discussion about Britain’s relationship with the bloc.
　　However, while offering some concessions designed to do that, Mrs. May did not give any fresh insight into the type of ties she ultimately wants Britain to have to the bloc-a question that divides her cabinet and her Conservative, or Tory, Party.
　　The European Union’s chief negotiators, Michel Barnier, issued a cautious response, saying in a statement that, “We look forward to the United Kingdom’s negotiators explaining the concrete implications of Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech. Our ambition is to find a rapid agreement on the conditions of the United Kingdom’s orderly withdrawal, as well as on a possible transition period.”
　　Although Britain is scheduled to exit the European Union in 2019, there has been little progress in talks since March, when London formally announced its intention to leave. Brussels is insisting that Britain agree to the terms of the divorce before discussing future trade ties, while the British would like to do both simultaneously.
　　In light of the continuing standoff, many business worry about a “cliff edge” scenario, in which Britain would crash out without a deal, so Mrs. May is under pressure to find a way out of the impasses. Speaking in Florence on Friday, Mrs. May did not say precisely how much money Britain would continue to contribute to the European Union. But she made a significant promise that the British-who are big net contributors to the bloc-would not leave a hole in the union’s budget in 2019 and 2020.
　　“I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave.” Mrs. May said. That would probably mean payments of around 20 billion euros, or about $24 billion, after Britain’s departure. It would also effectively maintain the state quo for the duration of a two-year transition period, meaning that Britain would allow the free movement of European workers and accept rulings from the European Court of Justice. This alone is unlikely to be enough to satisfy the 27 other member nations, but Mrs. May hinted that she would be willing to go further and “honor commitments we have made during the period of our membership.”
　　In addition, Mrs. May proposed a security partnership with the European Union, stressing Britain’s importance as a defense power, and also offered new legal safeguards to guarantee the rights of European Union citizens in Britain after Brexit.
　　Over all, Mrs. May sought to stress the common interest London shares with continental European capitals in reaching an agreement and avoiding disruption to trade, wrapping her odder in dialogue that was more positive, and less antagonistic, than that of some previous interventions.
　　European Union negotiators have refused to talk about post-Brexit ties until they judge that there is “sufficient progress” on the issues they consider a priority. the states of European Union citizens in Britain after it leaves, the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland(which is a part of the United Kingdom)and Britain’s financial commitments to the bloc.
　　There is little sign yet that the other 27 nations are prepared to grant Britain a bespoke agreement, and officials have warned London on numerous occasions that there would be no “cherry picking” of the parts of European Union membership it likes.
According to the passage, which of the

A.Britain has agreed to discuss the conditions of the exit before discussing the future trade ties.
B.Theresa May has mapped out the blue print of the relations between Britain and EU.
C.EU might not be satisfied with May’s Speech.
D.Britain is fully prepared to withdraw from EU in an orderly way.

资料：Seeking to end a stalemate in negotiations over her country’s withdrawal from the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain offered Friday substantial payments to the bloc during a two-year transition period immediately after the country’s exit.
　　Mrs. May’s long-awaited intervention, during a speech in Florence, Italy, was being watched closely in capitals on the Continent and in London, where members of her cabinet have been fiercely divided over Britain’s tortuous divorce from the bloc. The speech aimed to open the way to serious negotiations on what is commonly known as Brexit, and to a broader and more productive discussion about Britain’s relationship with the bloc.
　　However, while offering some concessions designed to do that, Mrs. May did not give any fresh insight into the type of ties she ultimately wants Britain to have to the bloc-a question that divides her cabinet and her Conservative, or Tory, Party.
　　The European Union’s chief negotiators, Michel Barnier, issued a cautious response, saying in a statement that, “We look forward to the United Kingdom’s negotiators explaining the concrete implications of Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech. Our ambition is to find a rapid agreement on the conditions of the United Kingdom’s orderly withdrawal, as well as on a possible transition period.”
　　Although Britain is scheduled to exit the European Union in 2019, there has been little progress in talks since March, when London formally announced its intention to leave. Brussels is insisting that Britain agree to the terms of the divorce before discussing future trade ties, while the British would like to do both simultaneously.
　　In light of the continuing standoff, many business worry about a “cliff edge” scenario, in which Britain would crash out without a deal, so Mrs. May is under pressure to find a way out of the impasses. Speaking in Florence on Friday, Mrs. May did not say precisely how much money Britain would continue to contribute to the European Union. But she made a significant promise that the British-who are big net contributors to the bloc-would not leave a hole in the union’s budget in 2019 and 2020.
　　“I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave.” Mrs. May said. That would probably mean payments of around 20 billion euros, or about $24 billion, after Britain’s departure. It would also effectively maintain the state quo for the duration of a two-year transition period, meaning that Britain would allow the free movement of European workers and accept rulings from the European Court of Justice. This alone is unlikely to be enough to satisfy the 27 other member nations, but Mrs. May hinted that she would be willing to go further and “honor commitments we have made during the period of our membership.”
　　In addition, Mrs. May proposed a security partnership with the European Union, stressing Britain’s importance as a defense power, and also offered new legal safeguards to guarantee the rights of European Union citizens in Britain after Brexit.
　　Over all, Mrs. May sought to stress the common interest London shares with continental European capitals in reaching an agreement and avoiding disruption to trade, wrapping her odder in dialogue that was more positive, and less antagonistic, than that of some previous interventions.
　　European Union negotiators have refused to talk about post-Brexit ties until they judge that there is “sufficient progress” on the issues they consider a priority. the states of European Union citizens in Britain after it leaves, the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland(which is a part of the United Kingdom)and Britain’s financial commitments to the bloc.
　　There is little sign yet that the other 27 nations are prepared to grant Britain a bespoke agreement, and officials have warned London on numerous occasions that there would be no “cherry picking” of the parts of European Union membership it likes.
　　There’s a stalemate between EU and Br

A.The two sides have not reached an agreement on conditions of Britain’s orderly exit.
B.Britain refuses to fill the financial bole of the EU.
C.British People are divided on the issue of Brexit.
D.EU does not want Britain to exit from it.

资料：Seeking to end a stalemate in negotiations over her country’s withdrawal from the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain offered Friday substantial payments to the bloc during a two-year transition period immediately after the country’s exit.
　　Mrs. May’s long-awaited intervention, during a speech in Florence, Italy, was being watched closely in capitals on the Continent and in London, where members of her cabinet have been fiercely divided over Britain’s tortuous divorce from the bloc. The speech aimed to open the way to serious negotiations on what is commonly known as Brexit, and to a broader and more productive discussion about Britain’s relationship with the bloc.
　　However, while offering some concessions designed to do that, Mrs. May did not give any fresh insight into the type of ties she ultimately wants Britain to have to the bloc-a question that divides her cabinet and her Conservative, or Tory, Party.
　　The European Union’s chief negotiators, Michel Barnier, issued a cautious response, saying in a statement that, “We look forward to the United Kingdom’s negotiators explaining the concrete implications of Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech. Our ambition is to find a rapid agreement on the conditions of the United Kingdom’s orderly withdrawal, as well as on a possible transition period.”
　　Although Britain is scheduled to exit the European Union in 2019, there has been little progress in talks since March, when London formally announced its intention to leave. Brussels is insisting that Britain agree to the terms of the divorce before discussing future trade ties, while the British would like to do both simultaneously.
　　In light of the continuing standoff, many business worry about a “cliff edge” scenario, in which Britain would crash out without a deal, so Mrs. May is under pressure to find a way out of the impasses. Speaking in Florence on Friday, Mrs. May did not say precisely how much money Britain would continue to contribute to the European Union. But she made a significant promise that the British-who are big net contributors to the bloc-would not leave a hole in the union’s budget in 2019 and 2020.
　　“I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave.” Mrs. May said. That would probably mean payments of around 20 billion euros, or about $24 billion, after Britain’s departure. It would also effectively maintain the state quo for the duration of a two-year transition period, meaning that Britain would allow the free movement of European workers and accept rulings from the European Court of Justice. This alone is unlikely to be enough to satisfy the 27 other member nations, but Mrs. May hinted that she would be willing to go further and “honor commitments we have made during the period of our membership.”
　　In addition, Mrs. May proposed a security partnership with the European Union, stressing Britain’s importance as a defense power, and also offered new legal safeguards to guarantee the rights of European Union citizens in Britain after Brexit.
　　Over all, Mrs. May sought to stress the common interest London shares with continental European capitals in reaching an agreement and avoiding disruption to trade, wrapping her odder in dialogue that was more positive, and less antagonistic, than that of some previous interventions.
　　European Union negotiators have refused to talk about post-Brexit ties until they judge that there is “sufficient progress” on the issues they consider a priority. the states of European Union citizens in Britain after it leaves, the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland(which is a part of the United Kingdom)and Britain’s financial commitments to the bloc.
　　There is little sign yet that the other 27 nations are prepared to grant Britain a bespoke agreement, and officials have warned London on numerous occasions that there would be no “cherry picking” of the parts of European Union membership it likes.
　　Theresa May’s speech mentioned the fo

A.The rights of EU’s citizens will be protected in Britain after the divorce.
B.Britain would be willing to continue to fulfill the commitment they have made during the period of membership.
C.A good trade relation between Britain and the EU is in line with the interests of both sides.
D.Britain will provide 20 billion euros to EU during the transition period.

资料：Italy's next government, a coalition between the populistFive Star Movement and the far-right Northern League, is giving investors plenty to worry about. Leaked plans, hastily abandoned, suggested it might want to leave the euro or ask the European Central Bank to forgive €250bn（$292bn） of Italian debt. But less attention has been paid to what it might mean for Italian banks, and in particular for their biggest burden: non-performing loans（NPLs）. Over €185bn of NPLs were outstanding at the end of 2017, the most for any country in the European Union. （1）
By comparison with Greece where NPLs are 45% of loans, Italy looks manageable with just 11.1%. And it has made progress: in late 2015 NPLs were 16.8% of loans. But any wild policy lurches would put that progress in question. The clean-up of banks’ books has relied on openness to foreign investors. Huge volumes of NPLs（€37bn in 2016 and over €47bn in 2017, according to Deloitte, a consultancy） have been sold by banks, often to specialist American hedge funds like Cerberus Capital Management or Fortress. （2）
These so-called vulture funds may find life harder under the new government. Given the importance of being able to repossess the collateral for secured loans, NPL investors have been taken aback by a proposal to prevent any action against a debtor without the involvement of a court. This would run counter to efforts to increase the use of out-of-court settlement for collateral across the EU. （3）
The future of GACS, a scheme for providing an Italian government guarantee to the senior tranches of NPL securitisations （with the EU's blessing）, is also in question. Despite a slow start in 2016, it has come to play a large role. An NPL sale last year by UniCredit, a large bank, worth€l7.7bn, was subject to the scheme. Another €38bn-worh of Italian NPL deals in progress will be too, according to Debtwire, a news service. But investors now worry that GACS will not be renewed once it expires失效 in September, contrary to previous plans. （4）
European regulators have made a concerted effort to deal with NPLs. In March the European Commission proposed laws to make cross-border operations easier for debt （5）
Markets have deepened in tandem. As well as the specialist funds doing large deals,more options for trading NPLs have emerged. One example is Debitos, a trading platform that started in Germany and that allows investors to trade in NPLs from 11 European countries, including Italy and Greece. Most of its sales are between €50m and €200m and interest often comes from local investors, says Timur Peters, its founder—for example, from individuals who buy property—backed NPLs as a way to acquire those properties. （6）
A liquid pan-European market in NPLs ought to prevent banks’ bad loans from accumulating and threatening their stability, as during the most recent crisis. But Italy would, because of its sheer size, be the largest source of such loans for the foreseeable future. And any market with real doubts about the largest supplier is almost certain to be a stunted one. （7）

Which is incorrect about the chart?

A.The total loans of Italy were about €1667bn in the year of 2017.
B.The proportion of the NPLs in total loans of Greece is the highest among all.
C.Greece had much more total loans than that of Spain in spite of lower NPLs.
D.France had most total loans in the list of about €4350bn in 2017.

Text4 Most forecasts suggest that Britain will be a poorer country afier Brexit,largely because trading with the European Union will become more difficult.Such predictions about the distant future are,by their nature,open to doubt,which is partly why Brexit's proponents feel free to dismiss them.But the same does not apply to a new paper by Meredith Crowley,Oliver Exton and Lu Han from Cambridge University,which suggests that,months before Brexit has even happened,trade is already suffering,as firms respond to the prospect of higher tariffs.More than 100,000 British businesses export goods to the EU each year.At present they enjoy tariff-free trade with the country's biggest export market.But all face uncertainty as Britain negotiates a new trading relationship with Brussels.Some fear disaster if the talks break down.British carmakers could face a l0%tanff to export to the EU market.Dairies might have to pay tariffs of more than 30%.These extra costs could make exporting uneconomic.The Cambridge paper looks at the exporting decisions of British firms,across 8,000 types of product,in response to the tariffs that Britain would face in the event of reaching no trade deal with the EU.Where necessary,they adjust their calculations to take account of exchange-rate fluctvations.Since the referendum many companies appear to have reduced their exports to the EU.The research suggests that the bigger the potential tariff facing a product,the more nervous:firms are about exporting it.Why risk producing for a market that could soon become unwelcoming?Overall,the number of companies that began exporting new products to the EU in 2016 would have been 5%higher if there had been a Remain vote,the paper finds.It is hard to know what those firms that decided against producing for the EU did instead.The research finds little evidence,however,that they have lived up to the hopes of Brexiteers and boosted their exports to fast-growing non-EU markets.Some may have tried to sell more within Britain.Businesses may have only temporarily scaled down their production of exports for the EU.Normal service could resume ifBritain negotiates a good trade deal.But some damage is already done.The paper's results imply that in 2016 Britain lost some~lbn（$1.3bn）of exports to the EU because of the mere threat of higher tariffs.The long-term impact will be greater.Some of the firms dissuaded from exporting would have turned into big beasts.The referendum was only halfway through 2016,and the paper does not analyse data after that year.Meanwhile,Brexit uncertainty continues to rise.
If new trading relationship failed,Britain would_____

A.seek other trade opportunities
B.lose lots of export markets
C.reduce their external trade
D.face more export tariffs

Text4 Most forecasts suggest that Britain will be a poorer country afier Brexit,largely because trading with the European Union will become more difficult.Such predictions about the distant future are,by their nature,open to doubt,which is partly why Brexit's proponents feel free to dismiss them.But the same does not apply to a new paper by Meredith Crowley,Oliver Exton and Lu Han from Cambridge University,which suggests that,months before Brexit has even happened,trade is already suffering,as firms respond to the prospect of higher tariffs.More than 100,000 British businesses export goods to the EU each year.At present they enjoy tariff-free trade with the country's biggest export market.But all face uncertainty as Britain negotiates a new trading relationship with Brussels.Some fear disaster if the talks break down.British carmakers could face a l0%tanff to export to the EU market.Dairies might have to pay tariffs of more than 30%.These extra costs could make exporting uneconomic.The Cambridge paper looks at the exporting decisions of British firms,across 8,000 types of product,in response to the tariffs that Britain would face in the event of reaching no trade deal with the EU.Where necessary,they adjust their calculations to take account of exchange-rate fluctvations.Since the referendum many companies appear to have reduced their exports to the EU.The research suggests that the bigger the potential tariff facing a product,the more nervous:firms are about exporting it.Why risk producing for a market that could soon become unwelcoming?Overall,the number of companies that began exporting new products to the EU in 2016 would have been 5%higher if there had been a Remain vote,the paper finds.It is hard to know what those firms that decided against producing for the EU did instead.The research finds little evidence,however,that they have lived up to the hopes of Brexiteers and boosted their exports to fast-growing non-EU markets.Some may have tried to sell more within Britain.Businesses may have only temporarily scaled down their production of exports for the EU.Normal service could resume ifBritain negotiates a good trade deal.But some damage is already done.The paper's results imply that in 2016 Britain lost some~lbn（$1.3bn）of exports to the EU because of the mere threat of higher tariffs.The long-term impact will be greater.Some of the firms dissuaded from exporting would have turned into big beasts.The referendum was only halfway through 2016,and the paper does not analyse data after that year.Meanwhile,Brexit uncertainty continues to rise.
We may learn from the paper that______

A.it focuses on Britain's exporting decisions
B.the higher the tariffs,the less exporters
C.Remain vote may promote export to EU
D.hopes ofBrexiteers are quickly fading

资料：Italy's next government, a coalition between the populistFive Star Movement and the far-right Northern League, is giving investors plenty to worry about. Leaked plans, hastily abandoned, suggested it might want to leave the euro or ask the European Central Bank to forgive €250bn（$292bn） of Italian debt. But less attention has been paid to what it might mean for Italian banks, and in particular for their biggest burden: non-performing loans（NPLs）. Over €185bn of NPLs were outstanding at the end of 2017, the most for any country in the European Union. （1）
By comparison with Greece where NPLs are 45% of loans, Italy looks manageable with just 11.1%. And it has made progress: in late 2015 NPLs were 16.8% of loans. But any wild policy lurches would put that progress in question. The clean-up of banks’ books has relied on openness to foreign investors. Huge volumes of NPLs（€37bn in 2016 and over €47bn in 2017, according to Deloitte, a consultancy） have been sold by banks, often to specialist American hedge funds like Cerberus Capital Management or Fortress. （2）
These so-called vulture funds may find life harder under the new government. Given the importance of being able to repossess the collateral for secured loans, NPL investors have been taken aback by a proposal to prevent any action against a debtor without the involvement of a court. This would run counter to efforts to increase the use of out-of-court settlement for collateral across the EU. （3）
The future of GACS, a scheme for providing an Italian government guarantee to the senior tranches of NPL securitisations （with the EU's blessing）, is also in question. Despite a slow start in 2016, it has come to play a large role. An NPL sale last year by UniCredit, a large bank, worth€l7.7bn, was subject to the scheme. Another €38bn-worh of Italian NPL deals in progress will be too, according to Debtwire, a news service. But investors now worry that GACS will not be renewed once it expires失效 in September, contrary to previous plans. （4）
European regulators have made a concerted effort to deal with NPLs. In March the European Commission proposed laws to make cross-border operations easier for debt （5）
Markets have deepened in tandem. As well as the specialist funds doing large deals,more options for trading NPLs have emerged. One example is Debitos, a trading platform that started in Germany and that allows investors to trade in NPLs from 11 European countries, including Italy and Greece. Most of its sales are between €50m and €200m and interest often comes from local investors, says Timur Peters, its founder—for example, from individuals who buy property—backed NPLs as a way to acquire those properties. （6）
A liquid pan-European market in NPLs ought to prevent banks’ bad loans from accumulating and threatening their stability, as during the most recent crisis. But Italy would, because of its sheer size, be the largest source of such loans for the foreseeable future. And any market with real doubts about the largest supplier is almost certain to be a stunted one. （7）

Which of the following goes against the interest of investors of NPLs?

A.The increasing use of out-of-court settlement for collateral across the EU.
B.The GACS which may not be renewed after September.
C.The new trading platform for trading NPLs.
D.The laws that guarantee cross-border operations.

资料：Seeking to end a stalemate in negotiations over her country’s withdrawal from the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain offered Friday substantial payments to the bloc during a two-year transition period immediately after the country’s exit.
　　Mrs. May’s long-awaited intervention, during a speech in Florence, Italy, was being watched closely in capitals on the Continent and in London, where members of her cabinet have been fiercely divided over Britain’s tortuous divorce from the bloc. The speech aimed to open the way to serious negotiations on what is commonly known as Brexit, and to a broader and more productive discussion about Britain’s relationship with the bloc.
　　However, while offering some concessions designed to do that, Mrs. May did not give any fresh insight into the type of ties she ultimately wants Britain to have to the bloc-a question that divides her cabinet and her Conservative, or Tory, Party.
　　The European Union’s chief negotiators, Michel Barnier, issued a cautious response, saying in a statement that, “We look forward to the United Kingdom’s negotiators explaining the concrete implications of Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech. Our ambition is to find a rapid agreement on the conditions of the United Kingdom’s orderly withdrawal, as well as on a possible transition period.”
　　Although Britain is scheduled to exit the European Union in 2019, there has been little progress in talks since March, when London formally announced its intention to leave. Brussels is insisting that Britain agree to the terms of the divorce before discussing future trade ties, while the British would like to do both simultaneously.
　　In light of the continuing standoff, many business worry about a “cliff edge” scenario, in which Britain would crash out without a deal, so Mrs. May is under pressure to find a way out of the impasses. Speaking in Florence on Friday, Mrs. May did not say precisely how much money Britain would continue to contribute to the European Union. But she made a significant promise that the British-who are big net contributors to the bloc-would not leave a hole in the union’s budget in 2019 and 2020.
　　“I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave.” Mrs. May said. That would probably mean payments of around 20 billion euros, or about $24 billion, after Britain’s departure. It would also effectively maintain the state quo for the duration of a two-year transition period, meaning that Britain would allow the free movement of European workers and accept rulings from the European Court of Justice. This alone is unlikely to be enough to satisfy the 27 other member nations, but Mrs. May hinted that she would be willing to go further and “honor commitments we have made during the period of our membership.”
　　In addition, Mrs. May proposed a security partnership with the European Union, stressing Britain’s importance as a defense power, and also offered new legal safeguards to guarantee the rights of European Union citizens in Britain after Brexit.
　　Over all, Mrs. May sought to stress the common interest London shares with continental European capitals in reaching an agreement and avoiding disruption to trade, wrapping her odder in dialogue that was more positive, and less antagonistic, than that of some previous interventions.
　　European Union negotiators have refused to talk about post-Brexit ties until they judge that there is “sufficient progress” on the issues they consider a priority. the states of European Union citizens in Britain after it leaves, the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland(which is a part of the United Kingdom)and Britain’s financial commitments to the bloc.
　　There is little sign yet that the other 27 nations are prepared to grant Britain a bespoke agreement, and officials have warned London on numerous occasions that there would be no “cherry picking” of the parts of European Union membership it likes.
　　What’s the purpose of May’s speech?(

A.To demonstrate her resolve to divorce Britain from EU.
B.To pave the way for dialogues and negotiations with EU on Brexit.
C.To comfort the sentiment of British people.
D.To end the division between her cabinet and the Conservative Party.

资料：Business,academic and civic leaders in Cambridge have warned that one of Britain’s major economic growth cities is under threat unless the government acts quickly to restore trust post-Brexit.
Company executives and educationists report some highly skilled foreign nationals quitting or refusing to commit to new jobs in Britain because of uncertainty over their future legal status here.It has in the past boasted of creating employment faster than China,amid a boom in the technology and bioscience sectors,which led to the city being labelled”Sillicon fen”,but now there are fears of a big slowdown.
“This is a unique economic asset for Europe,”said Lord Lansley,the former Conservation MP for South Cambridgeshire, after a specially convened meeting to discuss the problems with local politicians and others.”There is a [ political]vacuum out there and there does not seem to be a [ post Brexit] plan.There are things we need and if we get them we can continue to prosper and be more successful”,Lansley added.
He has drawn up a Cambridge declaration with his colleagues meant to reassure existing academic and business staff from abroad that their presence will be protected .”We are committed to international collaboration in research,science and the exploitation of innovative,knowledge-intensive enterprises,”says the document.
Lansley says he will be pushing the British government to give acquired rights to the 9,000 European citizens living in the East Anglian city out of a total population of 124,000.He also wants to see a continuation of free labour movement to allow Europeans to come to work and study in Cambridge and says”We need free movement for them to come to work and to study here.”

Why do these skilled foreign nationals choose not to work in Britain?

A.Because of the uncertainty
B.Because the economic slowdown after Britian leaving the EU
C.Because the increasing,difficulty of finding of finding a job in Britain
D.Because they may lose legal status after Brexit

There’s a stalemate between EU and Britain after Brexit because( )

A.the two sides have not reached an agreement on conditions of Britain’s orderly exit
B.British people are divided on the issue of Brexit
C.Britain refuses to fill the financial hole of the EU
D.EU does not want Britain to exit from it