Cambridge IELTS 11 Test 1 Writing Task 2: Sample Answer

Although roads remain indispensable, I largely agree that public money would be better invested in railways, because rail offers wider long-term benefits to society and the environment.

The strongest argument concerns congestion and pollution. A single commuter train can carry as many passengers as several hundred cars, so every new line removes a significant volume of traffic from city centres. Rail is also easier to electrify, which means far lower emissions per passenger and a realistic contribution towards national climate targets. Building more motorways, by contrast, often generates additional traffic and merely postpones the next jam. The money saved on constant road widening could instead be spent on modern trains, stations and signalling systems.

Railways also promote fairness and regional growth. People who cannot drive, such as the elderly, students and low-income families, depend on affordable public transport to reach jobs, universities and hospitals. Moreover, a fast connection can draw investment to towns that were previously isolated, as Japan's high-speed network has demonstrated over several decades.

Nevertheless, it would be unrealistic to neglect roads altogether. Buses, ambulances and delivery lorries all depend on them, and in sparsely populated areas, where a railway would serve very few passengers, a well-maintained road is the only practical option. A government that ignored road repairs would soon face higher accident rates and rising costs for businesses. Rail depends on roads too, since most passengers still need a bus or a taxi to reach the station.

In conclusion, governments should continue to fund essential road maintenance, but when it comes to major new projects, they should give priority to rail. This approach would ease urban traffic, protect the environment and give every citizen a more reliable way to travel.