Tips: Listen for how the speaker divides the money, and what each part is for.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Equal shares for grants and a small kitchen, with less kept to expand the kitchen later.: The speaker says a later budget could expand the kitchen if it is well used. The smaller share now goes to training and evaluation.
• The biggest share for grants, less for a small kitchen, and some for training and review.: Grants and the kitchen get the same amount, $100,000 each. Grants do not get the biggest share.
• The biggest share for grants, less for a small kitchen, and some to expand the kitchen later.: Grants and the kitchen get equal amounts. Any kitchen expansion would come from a later budget, so this choice gets both points wrong.

Correct Answer: Weak bookings or rising costs could make it costly, so fund today's shops instead.

Why this is correct: Critics say the building could become an expensive symbol if bookings are weak or costs rise. They would rather put the money into today's shops.

Tips: Several groups give reasons in this report. Match each reason and each solution to the right group.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Weak bookings or rising costs could make it costly, so fund street events instead.: Street events are the third group's idea. The critics want the money to go into today's shops.
• Owners know their needs better than a committee, so fund street events instead.: Owners knowing their needs is the grant supporters' point. Street events are the third group's idea.
• Owners know their needs better than a committee, so fund today's shops instead.: The critics do want money for today's shops. But the point about owners and committees comes from the grant supporters.

Correct Answer: To show that repair costs can drain a small shop's cash before it has a chance to grow.

Why this is correct: The first group says these problems can drain a small operator's cash before the business has a chance to grow. This supports their grant idea.

Tips: Ask yourself what problem the examples show, and which proposal they are meant to support.

Why the other options are wrong:

• To show that repair costs are better judged by shop owners than by a town committee.: Owners judging better than a committee is a separate point the group makes. The repair examples show the cost problem.
• To show that repair costs can be cut by sharing one well-equipped building.: A shared building is the second group's idea. The first group wants grants for each shop.
• To show that repair costs can drain a small shop's cash during quiet winter months.: The group says the cost comes before the business can grow. Winter is mentioned only with the festival idea.

Correct Answer: Firm, accepting that a less dramatic plan will let people down.

Why this is correct: The speaker admits the plan will disappoint people who want an immediate transformation. Still, the speaker says careful variety makes sense.

Tips: Check each choice against the exact words the speaker uses about people who want quick change.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Apologetic, hoping a later budget can win back the people who are let down.: The speaker does not apologise or promise anything to those people. A later budget is linked only to the kitchen.
• Worried, unsure that the plan is worth the disappointment it may cause.: The speaker is not unsure. Right after admitting the disappointment, the speaker says careful variety still makes sense.
• Dismissive, treating the wish for quick change as no real need at all.: The speaker says each side identifies a real need. So the speaker does not dismiss these people.

Correct Answer: Fifteen fewer businesses.

Why this is correct: The first group's plan allows forty awards of $4,000. The speaker's plan allows twenty-five. So fifteen fewer businesses could get the full amount.

Tips: Work out how many full grants each plan allows, then compare them.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Twenty fewer businesses.: Twenty awards would use the $80,000 left after the first group's $160,000. That is not the difference between the two plans.
• Twenty-five fewer businesses.: Twenty-five is the number of awards in the speaker's plan. The question asks how many fewer, so compare it with forty.
• Forty fewer businesses.: Forty is the number of awards in the first group's plan. The speaker's plan still gives twenty-five awards.

Correct Answer: Once organisers show how regular events would go on after the fund is spent.

Why this is correct: The speaker would postpone the festival until organisers show how regular programming would continue after the one-time money is gone.

Tips: Listen for who must show something, and what exactly they must show.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Once the first-year review shows short events can ease shops' year-round costs.: The speaker asks organisers for a plan, not a review. Year-round costs are a worry some merchants raise.
• Once organisers show that short events can ease shops' year-round costs.: Year-round costs are the merchants' worry. The speaker wants to know how regular events would continue.
• Once the first-year review shows how regular events would go on after the fund.: The first-year review is for grants, the kitchen and courses. The speaker asks the organisers themselves for the festival plan.