IELTS Writing Task 2
Sample Answer
Band 7+
15. In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Sample Answer 1
The allocation of funds for the construction of new railway lines for high-speed trains between cities is a contentious issue. Others argue that the funds should be used to improve existing public transport systems. This essay will present both perspectives and my own opinion.
Proponents of constructing new rail lines for high-speed trains between cities assert that there are numerous advantages. Initially, high-speed trains can significantly reduce travel time, thereby enhancing connectivity and economic development by facilitating the efficient transport of products and services. Second, it can reduce congestion on existing road networks, resulting in less traffic and environmental benefits such as lower carbon emissions. Additionally, rapid trains can boost the tourism industry by providing domestic and international visitors with convenient and comfortable travel options.
IELTS Speaking
Part-1 Practice
Those advocating for the improvement of extant public transport, on the other hand, contend that it is a more cost-effective and sustainable solution. Improving the efficacy, dependability, and accessibility of buses, trains, and trams can be advantageous for a larger population, including daily commuters and suburban residents. By investing in public transportation, cities can reduce traffic congestion, promote environmental sustainability, and enhance the quality of life for their residents.
I believe a balanced approach is necessary. Despite the fact that investing in new rail lines for high-speed trains can yield significant benefits, the significance of improving existing public transport systems should not be overlooked. Both alternatives can coexist and complement one another to form a comprehensive and effective transportation network. Governments should prioritise strategic planning and allocate funds to guarantee the development of high-speed trains and public transport in tandem.
In conclusion, allocating funds for new rail lines for high-speed trains versus enhancing existing public transport is a complex decision. While fast trains offer various advantages in terms of connectivity, economic development, and environmental benefits, the majority of the population still requires improved public transportation. A well-integrated transport network that meets the requirements of all individuals may result from striking a balance between these options.
Important Vocabulary and Phrases
contentious issue
construction of new railway lines
high-speed trains
enhance connectivity
economic development
efficient transport of products and services
reduce congestion
environmental benefits
boost the tourism industry
improve existing public transport systems
cost-effective and sustainable solution
reducing traffic congestion
environmental sustainability
enhance the quality of life
balanced approach
comprehensive and effective transportation network
strategic planning
prioritize high-speed trains and public transport
striking a balance
IELTS Speaking
Part-1 Practice
15. In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Sample Answer 2
BAND 6.5
There is little room for doubt that in commuters’ lives, the need for a means of transport to travel from one place to another in a modern world is paramount. The issue of either spending a considerable amount of money on new railway tracks or improving public transport is controversial, since there are strong arguments for and against it.
Indeed, there are numerous upsides to spending on fast trains. The first one is that it helps reduce a significant amount of traffic congestion on roads, especially in metro cities like Mumbai, Delhi and many more, as they are timesaving and one of the fastest means. Second, these trains have frequent service, which results in many people travelling on a single train in a fixed amount of time. As a result, it saves not only a sizeable amount of time, but also protects from a number of accidents on the roads. Moreover, metro trains are the cheapest, causing commuters to prefer to travel by trains due to their affordability and comfortability. If we travel by trains, they may be beneficial for controlling air pollution and saving non-renewable resources.
On the other hand, others argue that public funds should be spent on public transport to improve the quality of old buses and lanes because there are numerous factors. The major one is that buses are suitable for rural areas. In many developing countries, a sizeable portion of the population lives in rural areas, and they have to depend on public transport to commute, unlikely of the fastest means. These are the only means to stay connected with countryside areas. Added to this, to improve the road lanes so that bus transport becomes relatively fast and smooth. For instance, in London, buses are very frequent, which means people do not have to wait for buses to reach their destination.
In conclusion, it seems to me that both the means of public transport are essential for travellers, but the priority of spending money is entirely based on the area to area.
337 Words
15. In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Sample Answer 3
BAND 7
There is little doubt that the last 15 years have witnessed more development in public transport than the preceding 30 years. Some people opine that the government should spend more money on constructing new railway lines for modernized trains. Others believe that the money should be spent on improving existing public transport. My essay tends to dwell upon both views.
Indeed, there are numerous upsides to constructing new railway lines. One of the most important ones is time-saving. To put it another way, most people prefer to visit different destinations by train, which means if new railway lines are constructed, there will be no delays in their journey. Added to this is that most people prefer to visit their workplaces in private vehicles in metro cities. Consequently, if the government constructs new railway lines, their journeys will be easier and more comfortable. According to a survey conducted by the Times of India, 70% of the people in Germany love to visit distinct stations by train because they feel that trains are very economical as well as time-saving.
On the other hand, there is no denying the fact that the government should also improve existing public transport because it also has a vital role in commuting daily passengers to their place. Research shows that 80% of people in New Delhi travel to their workplace by bus, metres, and many others. Hence, by improving existing public transport, their journeys might be comfortable.
To conclude, I believe the government should build new railway lines because it might help passengers to travel to their dream destination in some time.
265 Words
15. In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Sample Answer 4
BAND 5.5
The last 20 years have seen remarkable changes in transportation than the previous 50 years. There is no denying the fact that transportation plays a vital role in the development of a nation. Many people think they should invest in establishing new railway lines between cities. However, others believe it will improve the existing transport system.
On the one hand, there are numerous upsides to constructing new railway lines. First and foremost, trains are the fastest and cheapest mode of transportation. Thus, people reach their destinations on time. Furthermore, trains can carry hundreds of people and tonnes of goods. Unlike private vehicles, which carry a maximum of 5 people. In addition to this, trains are environmentally friendly. They produce less pollution compared to vehicles on the roads. Hence, trains may also lead to a reduction in accident rates.
On the other hand, most people argue that the public transport system should be improved so that people do not use private vehicles for their daily commute. If buses are clean, people feel comfortable and may travel on them on a daily basis. This may reduce traffic congestion on roads, accident rates and pollution. For example, a recent survey has shown that private vehicles are the main cause of the increase in pollution.
In conclusion, it seems to me that investment in improving the existing system is better than constructing new railway lines because it requires a huge amount of money and time. Also, railways are not useful within cities.
248 Words