DISCUSSION: All of the wrong answers talk about arguments the author was making. Perhaps surprisingly, the author didn’t criticize uplift arrangements. Those were introduced on lines 13-20, without comment.
Instead, paragraphs 3 and 4 only criticize the financial restrictions discussed in lines 20-30.
- Same as D and E. The author actually didn’t talk about uplift arrangements, apart from introducing them (in lines 13-20).
Instead, the author spend all their time criticizing the financial restrictions introduced in lines 20-30.
- CORRECT. The author spent all of paragraph 3 (lines 30-40) complaining that the requirement to investigate finances would force lawyers to do a lot of extra work. This answer says that lawyers were already doing that work anyway.
- The author wasn’t criticizing predictions about whether the reforms would get enacted. They were critiquing the reforms themselves.
- Same as A. The author actually didn’t discuss uplift arrangements much. Uplift arrangements were introduced on lines 13-20.
Instead, the author spent all their time critiquing the restrictions on contingency arrangements discussed in lines 20-29.
- Same as D and E. The author actually made no argument about uplift arrangements. Instead, they spent their time on the financial restrictions imposed on when clients could use uplift arrangement. (The restrictions on lines 20-29.)