Why headlines are the way they are is usually very simple:
- They need to be concise (there is limited space)
- They need to be catchy (make people want to read the article)
There are two possible sentences that could have lead to this headline:
The Government has asked about the safety of the northeast community.
The Government has been asked about the safety of the northeast community.
Obviously all the articles were dropped, and part of the verb. Also, the word government has been abbreviated. This definitely makes the headline more concise.
Now, you are observing very correctly, we do no longer know if the government was asked, or if they did the asking. You will have to read the article to be sure. And hey, that is what the headline maker wanted: make you read the article. So, this headline is successful on both counts!
Now, even without reading the article, we can make an educated guess as to who did the asking.
If the government would be doing the asking, I would assume a present tense. After all, if the government asked something, and they have answers, I would not expect to be informed about their asking, I would expect to be informed about what they are doing or have done with the answer that they got. Of course, if someone has claimed tat they did not show any interest, it might be news-worthy to tell us that they asked.
However, if the government is asking now, the headline could simply sate "Govt. asks", even shorter than it is now.
So, without being able to be sure without reading the article, I would guess that someone, or some organisation asked the government about a situation; the implication being that the government now finds itself obliged to come up with information that it did not earlier share on its own accord.
The question touches on several issues. Stated as it is, there's no single answer.
However, many of the issues touched on are fairly well understood.
First, terminology. Passive refers to a syntactic process only. It does not refer to meaning.
Consequently one cannot "express the Passive voice by means of the active voice". Or by any means.
Passive is not "expressed". A Passive clause is determined by inspection. If a clause has
1. a be auxiliary verb, followed by the past participle of the main verb, and
2. a patient subject that could be the object of the active verb, and
3. an optional by-phrase agent that could be the subject of the active verb,
then it's Passive. Otherwise, it's not Passive. What it means or doesn't mean is irrelevant.
That's so you understand what I'm talking about, which is variation in Subject and Object.
Passive is just one of a number of ways English has to vary what nouns appear as Su and DO.
(which I suspect is what is meant in the original question, or I wouldn't answer it this way)
Two ways in particular are mentioned in the question.
One way is what Colin Fine points out is called the Middle construction, or alternation.
It's the first topic taken up, on p.26, in Beth Levin's book English Verb Classes and Alternations.
It has a lot of quirks; as Levin puts it,
The middle construction is characterized by a lack of specific time reference and by an understood but unexpressed agent. More often than not, a middle construction includes an adverbial or modal element.
Some other Middle examples (asterisk * before a sentence indicates an ungrammatical sentence):
- This book reads easily = This book can be read easily =
Unspec can read this book easily
- This book sells fast = This book sells itself =
Unspec can sell (many copies of) this book easily
- This dress travels well = It is easy (for
Unspec) to travel with this dress
but
- *French fabrics adore easily ≠ It is easy (for
Unspec) to adore French fabrics
Another way to vary Su and DO is to use a present participle, instead of a Passive:
- The bridge is still being built = The bridge is still building =
Unspec is still building the bridge
The second one of these is an areal variant, dating back to an earlier construction.
In some areas of the Anglophone world, one might even say The bridge is still a-building.
This is similar to the areal usages of present and past participles with need:
- This car needs washing = This car needs washed =
Unspec needs to wash this car
the second example above is, again, areal.
Best Answer
My Longman English Grammar by L. G. Alexander gives the following example in paragraph 16.32:
1 He is too heay (for me) to lift. (As an example not the very best.)
And as far as I can remember the normal thing is an active to-infinitive after "too + adjective as in
2 The text is too difficult (for me) to translate. (My own example)
Theoretically a passive to-infinitive should be possible but it is not the typical pattern.