Germany’s chimney sweeps—hallowed as bringers of good luck, with their black top hats and coiled-wire brushes— are under attack. Last week the European Commission’s directorate for the internal market revived proceedings against an antiquated German law that protects sweeps against competition. The country’s chimney sweeps enjoy a near-perfect monopoly. Germany is divided into around 8000 districts, each ruled by its own master sweep who usually employs two more sweeps. Although this is a private enterprise, the maintenance and inspection service provided is compulsory and prices are set by the local authority: sweeps cannot stray outside their district, nor can householders change their sweep even if they loathe him. This rule cuts both ways. "There are some customers I can’t stand either," says one Frankfurt sweep.
The rationale is simple: chimney-sweeping and related gas and heating maintenance in Germany are treated as a matter of public safety. Annual or semi-annual visits are prescribed, keeping the sweeps busy all year round. For centuries, chimney-sweeps in Europe were a wandering breed. But in 1937 the chimney-sweep law was revised by Heinrich Himmler, then the acting interior minister. His roles tied chimney sweeps to their districts and decreed that they should be German, to enable him to use sweeps as local spies.
The law was updated in 1969, leaving the local monopolies in place but opening up the profession, in theory at least, to non-Germ, ans. But in practice few apply. Four years ago a brave Pole qualified as a master in Kaiserslautern, according to a fellow student, and this year an Italian did so in the Rhineland Palatinate. But he, like most newly qualified German masters, will spend years on a waiting list before he gets his own district.
The European Commission would like to see a competitive market in which people can choose their own sweeps, just as they choose builders or plumbers. It first opened infringement proceedings in 2003, and the German government of the time promised to change the law but failed to do so. And despite the huffing and puffing from Brussels, tile government is still reluctant to dismantle its antiquated system on safety grounds. The number of deaths from carbon-monoxide poisoning in Germany is around one-tenth that in France or Belgium, claims the Frankfurt sweep. So Germans are likely to be stock with their neighbourhood Schornsteinfegers—whether they can stand each other or not—for some time to come.
What’s the author’s attitude toward the anti-monopoly of chimney sweeping in Germany()
A. Inevitable
B. Possible
C. Pessimistic
D. Optimistic
参考答案:A
解析:
[直击题眼] 全文。
[深层剖析] 文中讲了德国的烟囱清洁垄断法令带来的弊端、欧盟委员会对其提出的诉讼、德国对此法令做出的修改以及外国申请者的成功等事实,文章最后又提出这样的垄断还会存在“一段时间(for some time to come)”而非一直存在,且文中提及这种法律体系时用的都是antiquated“陈旧的,过时的”等词,这些都说明作者认为废除这样的垄断是势在必行、不可避免的,故[A]正确。
[主干扰项分析] [D]与[A]意思有相近之处,但从德国现状来说,完全消除垄断尚需时日,虽然这种结果已是必然,但其过程可能还比较曲折,如文章最后一句所说至少在未来一段时间内德国人还不得不用本地清扫工,故[D]不及[A]准确。
[次干扰项分析] [B]、[C]和[A]是相反的,故均不正确。