20. 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

Band 8.5

The debate over whether to invest in new high-speed railway lines or improve existing public transport is a contentious one. This essay will discuss both perspectives and provide my viewpoint.

On one hand, those in favor of constructing new railway lines argue that high-speed trains can significantly reduce travel time between cities, boosting economic growth by facilitating business travel and tourism. Moreover, high-speed trains are often more comfortable and reliable than other forms of public transport, providing a superior travel experience.

On the other hand, critics argue that the priority should be improving existing public transport. They contend that investing in local transport networks can have a more direct impact on the daily lives of citizens. Enhancing the efficiency, accessibility, and affordability of public transport can promote social equity and reduce traffic congestion. Furthermore, upgrading existing infrastructure is often more cost-effective than building new railway lines.

In my opinion, a balanced approach is needed. While high-speed trains can bring substantial benefits, it is crucial not to overlook the importance of efficient local transport systems. Therefore, investment decisions should be based on a careful analysis of the specific needs and circumstances of each region. For instance, high-speed trains may be more suitable for countries with vast distances between major cities, while improving existing public transport may be more beneficial in densely populated urban areas.

In conclusion, both constructing new railway lines for high-speed trains and improving existing public transport have their merits. The best approach depends on various factors, including geographical, economic, and social considerations. A comprehensive transport strategy should aim to meet both local and long-distance travel needs effectively.

Difficult Words with Meanings and Example Sentences:

Word: Contentious (adjective)

Meaning: Causing or likely to cause argument or disagreement.

Example Sentence: The proposed policy change regarding free speech is a contentious issue.

Word: Facilitate (verb)

Meaning: To make something easier or possible.

Example Sentence: Improved technology can facilitate communication and collaboration across borders.

Word: Equity (noun)

Meaning: The quality of being fair and just.

Example Sentence: Promoting equity in education ensures that everyone has equal opportunities to succeed.

Word: Affordability (noun)

Meaning: The state of being able to afford something.

Example Sentence: Rising costs of living threaten the affordability of essential goods and services.

Word: Upgrading (verb)

Meaning: To improve the quality or performance of something.

Example Sentence: Schools are upgrading their technology to provide students with better learning resources.

Word: Balanced (adjective)**

Meaning: Giving fair consideration to all sides of an issue.

Example Sentence: A balanced budget must consider both revenue and expenditure.

Word: Circumstance (noun)

Meaning: A set of facts that affect a situation.

Example Sentence: The decision was made based on the specific circumstances of the case.

Word: Merit (noun)**

Meaning: A positive quality or feature.

Example Sentence: Both proposals have their own merits, and a careful evaluation is necessary.

Word: Comprehensive (adjective)**

Meaning: Including everything that is necessary.

Example Sentence: A comprehensive healthcare plan covers a wide range of medical needs.

20. 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 8.5

                   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.

                      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.

Difficult Words with Meanings and Example Sentences:

Word: Contentious

Meaning: Causing or likely to cause argument or disagreement.

Example sentence: The decision on contentious new taxes continues to divide the city council.

Word: Extant

Meaning: Still existing or in use.

Example sentence: Many European cities boast extant tram systems dating back over a century.

Word: Efficacy

Meaning: The effectiveness of something in producing a desired effect.

Example sentence: Doubts were raised about the efficacy of the proposed changes to the bus schedule.

Word: Dependant

Meaning: Relying on someone or something else.

Example sentence: Many dependant commuters need reliable and affordable public transport options.

Word: Suburban

Meaning: Relating to the area outside a city, especially where people live.

Example sentence: Residents in suburban areas often rely heavily on cars due to limited public transport.

Word: Strategic

Meaning: Carefully planned to achieve a specific goal.

Example sentence: Strategic investment in transportation infrastructure is crucial for economic growth.

Word: Tandem

Meaning: Done or used together.

Example sentence: Both high-speed rail and improved public transport can work in tandem to create a robust network.

20. 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 8

There is little doubt that the last 15 years have seen more development in public transport than the preceding 30 years. Some people argue that the government should allocate more funds to the construction of new railway lines for modernized trains, while others advocate for investing in the improvement of existing public transport. I will explore both perspectives in this essay.

Constructing new railway lines comes with several advantages. Foremost among them is the potential for time savings. Many people prefer train travel for various destinations, and the construction of new railway lines could alleviate delays in their journeys. Additionally, in metropolitan cities, where private vehicles are often used for commuting to workplaces, new railway lines could provide a more convenient and comfortable alternative. A survey conducted by the Times of India reveals that 70% of people in Germany prefer train travel for its economic and time-saving benefits.

On the other hand, there is a compelling argument for investing in the improvement of existing public transport. Many individuals in cities like New Delhi primarily rely on buses and metros to travel to their workplaces, making the enhancement of these services crucial. Research indicates that 80% of people in New Delhi choose buses, metros, and similar modes of public transport for their daily commutes. Improving these existing services could significantly enhance the comfort of their journeys.

In conclusion, while both perspectives have their merits, I lean towards the belief that constructing new railway lines holds more promise. It has the potential to offer efficient and comfortable travel experiences, addressing the evolving needs of commuters in our modern world.

20. 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 8.5

In the daily lives of commuters, the necessity for efficient means of transportation is undeniable. The debate over whether to allocate funds for new railway tracks or enhance public transport is contentious, with compelling arguments on both sides.

Investing in fast trains carries several advantages. Firstly, it alleviates significant traffic congestion, particularly in bustling metro cities like Mumbai and Delhi, offering a swift and time-saving alternative. The frequent service of these trains accommodates a large number of passengers in a fixed timeframe, not only saving time but also reducing the risk of accidents on roads. Furthermore, metro trains, being cost-effective and comfortable, make them a preferred choice for commuters. Opting for trains contributes to controlling air pollution and conserving non-renewable resources.

Conversely, proponents argue that public funds should be directed towards improving existing public transport infrastructure, including buses and road lanes. This is especially crucial for rural areas in many developing countries, where a substantial population relies on public transport, unlike faster alternatives. Enhancing road infrastructure, coupled with improved bus services, can provide smoother and faster commuting options. The example of London's frequent buses illustrates how efficient public transport can mitigate the waiting time for travelers.

In conclusion, while both modes of public transport are vital for commuters, the allocation of funds should be tailored to the specific needs of each area. A balanced approach, considering the unique requirements of different regions, ensures comprehensive and effective transportation solutions.

20. 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 5

Band 8

The last two decades have witnessed remarkable changes in transportation, surpassing the developments of the preceding 50 years. There is no denying the pivotal role transportation plays in a nation's development. While some advocate for investments in establishing new railway lines between cities, others contend that improving the existing transport system is the key.

Constructing new railway lines carries several advantages. First and foremost, trains are recognized as the fastest and most cost-effective mode of transportation, ensuring timely arrivals at destinations. Moreover, trains have the capacity to carry hundreds of passengers and large quantities of goods, providing efficiency in mass transit. Unlike private vehicles, which are limited in capacity, trains contribute to reduced pollution and lower accident rates, making them environmentally friendly.

Conversely, proponents of improving the existing public transport system argue that enhancing its quality would discourage the use of private vehicles for daily commutes. The emphasis is on making buses cleaner and more comfortable to encourage daily usage. This approach aims to alleviate traffic congestion, reduce accident rates, and mitigate pollution. Recent surveys highlight private vehicles as a significant contributor to the surge in pollution.

In conclusion, the preference for investing in the improvement of the existing transport system appears more prudent to me. Constructing new railway lines demands substantial resources in terms of money and time, and railways may not serve as effectively within cities. Focusing on refining the current public transport infrastructure addresses immediate needs and contributes to sustainable development.