Répondre à une question de relance sur la taxe vestimentaire
À l'oral du bac blanc d'anglais, au lycée d'Abidjan-Cocody, un candidat dispose de dix minutes de préparation. Le document sonore, résumé par écrit, présente un débat sur les vêtements de seconde main. Un responsable douanier ghanéen déclare : « Nous n'interdisons pas ces vêtements ; nous portons la taxe de 5 à 15 pesewas par pièce pour financer le tri des déchets textiles. » Une journaliste répond : « C'est une interdiction déguisée qui menacera 15 000 emplois. » Le candidat note que 40 % du marché vestimentaire local dépend de ces importations. L'examinateur lui demande : « Is taxing second-hand clothes a good way to protect the local textile industry? » Le candidat a préparé trois arguments pour la taxe, mais il a mal noté le chiffre et confond taxe et interdiction. Il doit parler deux minutes, puis répondre à une question de relance.
1. Summarise the document in two sentences, distinguishing one fact from one opinion.
Read the worked answer
Model answer
One verifiable fact in the document is that the levy on second-hand clothes is being raised from 5 to 15 pesewas per item; the stated purpose is to fund textile waste sorting. One opinion is the journalist's claim that this is a 'disguised ban' which will threaten 15,000 jobs.
Reasoning : the levy figure and its official purpose can be checked against a customs notice or budget document. The phrase 'disguised ban' is an interpretation: it predicts effects and attributes an intention. The job figure may be an estimate, but the claim that the tax is a disguised ban remains an opinion, not a neutral description. A good oral answer must not present the journalist's interpretation as if it were the official measure.
2. Give a reasoned answer to the examiner's question, using at least one argument for and one against the tax.
Read the worked answer
Model answer
I would not treat the levy as a simple solution. On the one hand, a higher levy can fund collection and sorting of textile waste, and it can make imported second-hand clothes slightly less attractive, giving local tailors and textile producers a chance to compete. On the other hand, the tax is regressive: low-income families rely on cheap second-hand clothes, and a levy of 15 pesewas per item can add up for a household buying several items. It may also threaten jobs in the informal resale sector, which the document links to 15,000 workers.
My position would therefore be conditional: I would support a moderate levy only if the revenue is clearly earmarked for waste management and for support to local textile workers, and if the poorest households are protected. A tax designed only to raise revenue, without visible waste collection, would look like a disguised restriction and would lose public trust.
3. The examiner says: 'So you support banning imports?' Write the two sentences you would say to correct the misunderstanding politely.
Read the worked answer
Model answer
'I'm afraid I may have given that impression, but I don't support a ban on imports. What I was arguing for is a carefully designed levy whose revenue is used for waste collection and support for local workers, not a prohibition that would cut off an affordable supply of clothes.'
Why this works : the first sentence acknowledges the misunderstanding without accusing the examiner. The second restates the position in positive terms: 'a carefully designed levy', not 'a ban'. It also gives the reason, affordable supply, which shows that the candidate has listened to the counter-argument. A simple 'No, you are wrong' would be impolite and would not repair the confusion.