Level: IELTS Academic Writing Task 2
Task type: Discuss both views without giving a personal opinion
Recommended time: 40 minutes
Word count: At least 250 words
Question
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Write about the following topic:
Some people believe that public transport should be free for everyone. Others think that passengers should pay because public transport is expensive to operate.
Discuss both views.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Write at least 250 words.
How to Write This Essay
This is a discuss both views essay. The question does not ask for your personal opinion, so you should explain both sides fairly and avoid phrases such as:
- I believe…
- In my opinion…
- I strongly agree…
Instead, your essay should present both arguments clearly.
The two views are:
- Public transport should be free for everyone.
- Passengers should pay because public transport is expensive to run.
A strong answer should explain why some people support free public transport and why others think fares are necessary.
Suggested Essay Structure
Introduction
Paraphrase the question and say that both views will be discussed.
Body paragraph 1: Why public transport should be free
Possible ideas:
- Free public transport could reduce car use.
- It may reduce traffic congestion and air pollution.
- It would help low-income people travel to work, school and hospital appointments.
- It could make cities more equal and accessible.
Body paragraph 2: Why passengers should pay
Possible ideas:
- Public transport is expensive to operate and maintain.
- Drivers, fuel, electricity, repairs and safety systems all cost money.
- If passengers do not pay, the government must cover the cost through taxes.
- Free services may become overcrowded or poorly maintained.
Conclusion
Summarise both views without giving a personal opinion.
Useful Vocabulary for This Topic
- public transport
- buses, trains and trams
- passenger fares
- operating costs
- maintenance
- government subsidies
- taxpayers
- traffic congestion
- air pollution
- low-income residents
- affordable travel
- accessibility
- overcrowding
- service quality
- transport network
- urban mobility
- environmentally friendly
Common Mistakes to Avoid
Do not give a personal opinion if the question only says Discuss both views.
Do not write only about free public transport. You must explain both sides.
Do not ignore cost. The second view is specifically about public transport being expensive to operate.
Do not say free public transport is actually free. It would still need to be paid for by governments, usually through taxation.
Do not make unrealistic claims such as “everyone would stop driving” or “all public transport would become terrible”. Use balanced language.
Band 6.5 Model Answer
In many cities, people disagree about whether public transport should be free for all passengers or whether users should continue to pay fares. There are arguments on both sides, as free transport could help society, while paid transport may be necessary to cover costs.
Some people believe that public transport should be free because it would make travel easier and fairer. Many low-income people depend on buses, trains and trams to get to work, school or hospital appointments. If these services were free, people with less money would have more opportunities and would not be limited by transport costs. Free public transport could also encourage people to use their cars less often. This might reduce traffic congestion and air pollution, especially in large cities where roads are already crowded.
However, others argue that passengers should pay because public transport is expensive to operate. A transport system needs drivers, fuel or electricity, repairs, stations, safety checks and cleaning. If passengers do not pay, the government must find the money from taxes or reduce spending in other areas, such as education or healthcare. Another problem is that free public transport may become overcrowded if too many people use it. This could make journeys less comfortable and may require even more investment in extra buses or trains.
In conclusion, supporters of free public transport argue that it would make travel fairer and reduce pollution. On the other hand, those who support passenger fares believe that public transport needs regular income to remain safe, reliable and well maintained.
Word count: 252 words
Band 6.5 Feedback
This is a clear and relevant essay. It discusses both views and does not give a personal opinion, which is correct for this task.
Why this is around Band 6.5:
Task Response:
The essay answers the question directly. It explains why free public transport may be socially useful and why paid fares may be necessary. However, the ideas are developed in a fairly simple way.
Coherence and Cohesion:
The structure is clear: introduction, free transport, paid transport and conclusion. The linking is accurate but quite basic, using phrases such as “however”, “another problem” and “in conclusion”.
Lexical Resource:
The vocabulary is suitable for the topic, including “low-income people”, “traffic congestion”, “air pollution”, “safety checks” and “well maintained”. However, the range is not especially sophisticated.
Grammar:
The grammar is generally accurate. There is a mix of sentence types, but many sentences are direct and predictable.
How to improve it:
To reach Band 7 or higher, the essay would need more precise development, stronger examples and more advanced topic vocabulary.
Band 8 Model Answer
Whether public transport should be free for all users is a common debate in many modern cities. Advocates of free travel argue that it would create social and environmental benefits, while opponents maintain that fare income is essential because transport networks are costly to operate and maintain.
Those who support free public transport often focus on equality and sustainability. For people on low incomes, even modest daily fares can become a significant financial burden, particularly if they need to travel long distances for work, education or medical care. Removing fares could therefore improve access to employment and public services. It may also persuade more people to leave their cars at home, especially for short urban journeys. If buses, trams and trains became free and convenient, cities could experience lower traffic congestion, reduced emissions and less pressure on parking spaces. In this sense, free public transport is seen not merely as a transport policy, but as a public health and environmental measure.
The opposing view is that public transport cannot function effectively without reliable funding. Running a transport network involves substantial costs, including staff wages, vehicle maintenance, electricity or fuel, station management, security and future expansion. If passengers paid nothing, these costs would have to be covered through higher taxes or cuts to other public services. There is also a risk that free transport could increase demand beyond capacity, leading to overcrowded buses and trains. Unless governments invested heavily at the same time, service quality might decline, making public transport less attractive in practice.
Overall, the argument for free public transport is based on fairness, accessibility and environmental improvement. By contrast, the case for passenger fares is based on financial sustainability, service quality and the practical cost of running large transport systems.
Word count: 284 words
Band 8 Explanation
This is a stronger essay because it discusses both views in a more developed and precise way while staying neutral.
Task Response:
The essay fully addresses both sides of the debate. It explains the social and environmental argument for free public transport, then explains the financial and practical argument for passenger fares. It does not give a personal opinion, which matches the task.
Coherence and Cohesion:
The organisation is controlled and logical. The first body paragraph presents the case for free transport. The second body paragraph presents the case for paid transport. The conclusion summarises both sides clearly without choosing one.
Lexical Resource:
The vocabulary is more advanced and topic-specific:
- advocates of free travel
- social and environmental benefits
- transport networks
- equality and sustainability
- financial burden
- access to employment
- reduced emissions
- public health and environmental measure
- reliable funding
- substantial costs
- future expansion
- financial sustainability
The vocabulary is natural and accurate.
Grammar:
The essay uses a strong range of sentence structures:
- “Those who support free public transport often focus on…”
- “For people on low incomes, even modest daily fares can…”
- “If buses, trams and trains became free and convenient, cities could…”
- “Unless governments invested heavily at the same time, service quality might…”
The grammar is flexible and well controlled.
Key Lesson for Students
For a discuss both views essay without a personal opinion, your job is to explain both arguments fairly.
Do not write:
In my opinion, public transport should be free.
Instead, write a neutral conclusion such as:
Supporters of free public transport focus on fairness and environmental benefits, while supporters of passenger fares emphasise cost, reliability and service quality.
Useful Phrases for This Essay
Introducing both views
- Some people argue that public transport should be free for everyone.
- Others believe that passengers should contribute through fares.
- There are strong arguments on both sides of this debate.
- This essay will discuss both perspectives.
Explaining free public transport
- Free public transport could make cities more accessible.
- It would particularly benefit low-income residents.
- Removing fares may encourage people to use cars less often.
- This could reduce congestion and air pollution.
- Free travel can be seen as a public service.
Explaining paid public transport
- Public transport systems are expensive to operate.
- Passenger fares provide an important source of income.
- Without fares, the cost would fall on taxpayers.
- Free services could become overcrowded.
- Regular income is needed to maintain safe and reliable services.
Writing a neutral conclusion
- Supporters of free transport emphasise fairness and environmental benefits.
- Those who favour fares focus on cost and service quality.
- The debate therefore involves both social benefits and financial realities.
Practice Task
Before reading the model answers again, write your own essay using this neutral position:
Free public transport could improve equality and reduce pollution, but passenger fares may be necessary to cover operating costs and maintain service quality.
Try to include:
a neutral conclusion that summarises both views without giving your personal opinion
one paragraph explaining the benefits of free public transport
one paragraph explaining why passengers may need to pay
