地特三等
107年
[一般行政] 法學知識與英文(包括中華民國憲法、法學緒論、英文)
第 43 題
📖 題組：
In a city where eating well is an obsession, a statement by a senior official published in a national newspaper caused a public outcry. Vallop Suwandee, who chairs an advisory board to the governor of Bangkok, was quoted as saying that street vendors would be removed from all 50 districts of the city. It seemed that one of the most popular and distinctive aspects of Bangkok life was to be wiped out, days after CNN had voted Bangkok the best place in the world for street food, and just two months before the city government was planning to hold a street-food festival. Mr. Vallop now says he was misquoted: “Let me be clear, on behalf of the city of Bangkok. Street food will continue to be part of Bangkok life, on the condition that there will not be obstructions for pedestrians, and that the vendors observe sanitary rules in the interest of public health. We will allow them to be in certain areas, under strict conditions.” This is not the first time the Bangkok Metropolitan Authority (BMA), which is responsible for running the city, has tried to impose order and standards on the hundreds of thousands of food vendors operating on the streets. Right after the BMA was first established in 1972, it launched a similar campaign to force the vendors to operate in designated markets instead. Variations of that campaign were revived every few years but implementation has always been weak because the BMA recognised the vital role street vending played in providing a source of income in difficult economic times. Most of the time it has quietly chosen not to push too hard. This time may be different. The number of officially approved locations for street food vendors has been cut dramatically, from a peak of 726 four years ago to 243 by the end of last year. Tens of thousands of vendors have been forced to move already, leaving many downtown areas like Siam Square, Asok and Silom with few or no street-food stalls now visible during the day and night. The most recent area to be cleared is the increasingly wealthy neighbourhood of Thonglor. A small side street, or soi, which for many years had been famous for its street food, is no more, although city officials say the vendors were offered alternative locations in smaller sois further away.
In a city where eating well is an obsession, a statement by a senior official published in a national newspaper caused a public outcry. Vallop Suwandee, who chairs an advisory board to the governor of Bangkok, was quoted as saying that street vendors would be removed from all 50 districts of the city. It seemed that one of the most popular and distinctive aspects of Bangkok life was to be wiped out, days after CNN had voted Bangkok the best place in the world for street food, and just two months before the city government was planning to hold a street-food festival. Mr. Vallop now says he was misquoted: “Let me be clear, on behalf of the city of Bangkok. Street food will continue to be part of Bangkok life, on the condition that there will not be obstructions for pedestrians, and that the vendors observe sanitary rules in the interest of public health. We will allow them to be in certain areas, under strict conditions.” This is not the first time the Bangkok Metropolitan Authority (BMA), which is responsible for running the city, has tried to impose order and standards on the hundreds of thousands of food vendors operating on the streets. Right after the BMA was first established in 1972, it launched a similar campaign to force the vendors to operate in designated markets instead. Variations of that campaign were revived every few years but implementation has always been weak because the BMA recognised the vital role street vending played in providing a source of income in difficult economic times. Most of the time it has quietly chosen not to push too hard. This time may be different. The number of officially approved locations for street food vendors has been cut dramatically, from a peak of 726 four years ago to 243 by the end of last year. Tens of thousands of vendors have been forced to move already, leaving many downtown areas like Siam Square, Asok and Silom with few or no street-food stalls now visible during the day and night. The most recent area to be cleared is the increasingly wealthy neighbourhood of Thonglor. A small side street, or soi, which for many years had been famous for its street food, is no more, although city officials say the vendors were offered alternative locations in smaller sois further away.
Why didn't BMA carry out their plans to remove street vendors much earlier?
- A Because they didn't have enough governmental and public support.
- B Because they didn't have appropriate means of implementing.
- C Because they acknowledged the vendors' contributions to the country's economy.
- D Because they didn't propose acceptable and effective strategies for implementation.
思路引導 VIP
想像你是一位城市管理者，當你準備推行一項整頓法律時，卻發現被整頓的對象正是支撐城市底層民生生計的核心力量，此時除了法律條文，你會考慮什麼樣的「現實因素」而選擇暫緩執法？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
恭喜你精準地掌握了這題的關鍵細節！在地方特考三等的英文閱讀測驗中，針對特定「因果關係」的細節理解題，是檢驗考生能否在長文中定位關鍵證據的核心指標。你能選對 (C) 選項，代表你已經具備了優異的資訊檢索與語意轉換能力。
政策推遲的經濟考量
這道題目的核心考點在於文章中段提到的政策背景。文中明確指出，雖然曼谷大都會管理局（BMA）早在 1972 年就想整頓攤販，但過去幾十年來的執行力（implementation）始終很弱。關鍵句在於：the BMA recognised the vital role street vending played in providing a source of income in difficult economic times.（BMA 認可了路邊攤在經濟困難時期，作為收入來源所扮演的重要角色）。這句話直接對應到選項 (C) 中的「承認攤販對國家經濟的貢獻」。
▼ 還有更多解析內容