Read the passage and then answer the questions which follow.

The life cycle of the committee is so basic to our knowledge of current affairs that it is surprising more attention has not been paid to the science of comitology. The first and most elementary principle of this science is that a committee is organic rather than mechanical in its nature: it is not a structure but a plant. It takes root and grows, it flowers, wilts, and dies, scattering the seed from which other committees will bloom in their turn. Only those who bear this principle in mind can make real headway in understanding the structure and history of modern government.
Committees, it is nowadays accepted, fall broadly into two categories, those

(a) from which the individual member has something to gain; and those

(b) to which the individual member merely has something to contribute.
Examples of the

(b) group, however, are relatively unimportant for our purpose; indeed, some people doubt whether they are committees at all. It is from the more robust

(a) group that we can learn most readily the principles which are common (with modifications) to all. Of the

(a) group the most deeply rooted and luxuriant committees are those which confer the most power and prestige upon their members. In most parts of the world these committees are called 'cabinets'.
When first examined under the microscope, the ideal size of a cabinet council usually appears - to comitologists, historians, and even to the people who appoint cabinets - to be five. With that number the plant is viable, allowing for two members to be absent or sick at any one time. Five members are easy to collect, and, when collected, can act with competence, secrecy and speed. Of these original members four may well be versed, respectively in finance, foreign policy, defence and the law. The fifth, who has failed to master any of these subjects, usually becomes the chairman or prime minister.
Whatever the apparent convenience might be of restricting the membership to five, however, we discover by observation that the total number soon rises to seven or nine. The usual excuse given for this increase, which is almost invariable (exceptions being found, however, in Luxembourg and Honduras), is the need for special knowledge on more than four topics. In fact, however, there is another and more potent reason for addition to the team. For in a cabinet of nine it will be found that policy is made by three, information supplied by two, and financial warning uttered by one. With the neutral chairman, that accounts for seven, the other two appearing at first glance to be merely ornamental. This allocation of duties was first noted in Britain in about 1639, but there can be no doubt that the folly of including more than three able and talkative men on one committee had been discovered long before that. We know little as yet about the function of the two silent members but we have good reason to believe that a cabinet, in this second stage of development, might be unworkable without them.
C. Northcote Parkinson, Parkinson's Law

(a) Explain the meaning, in their context, of the following:
organic comitologist viable potent.

(b) What is the implication of the statement 'The fifth ... prime minister'?

(c) Why might people doubt whether the

(b) group are committees at all?

(d) Why is it foolish to include more than three able and talkative men in one committee?

(e) What is the purpose of the ironic reference to Luxembourg and Honduras?

(f) Suggest the function of the two silent members.