Cambridge 20 Writing Task 2 Test 1 - Sample Answers (Band 9 to 4-5)

Clean water is unquestionably a precondition for human survival, and I agree that every person is entitled to it. I would argue, however, that supplying it entirely free of charge to every household is not the most effective way to guarantee this right, since doing so removes any incentive to conserve a resource that is often scarce.

There is little doubt that water deserves the same protected status as food or shelter. Where a household cannot afford piped water, the consequences are severe: preventable disease, time lost fetching water from distant sources, and children kept out of school to help with this task. Governments that treat water purely as a commercial product, sold to the highest bidder, effectively price the poorest out of a resource essential to life. On these grounds, framing water access as a right rather than a privilege is entirely justified.

Making the supply completely free for everyone, however, creates a different problem. Utilities still have to fund the pipes, treatment plants, and staff that bring water to a tap, and if no household pays anything, that funding must come from general taxation, which places an equal burden on people with vastly different levels of water use, rewarding waste rather than restraint. A fairer model, already used in cities such as Cape Town, is to guarantee a modest free allowance for every home, generous enough to cover drinking, cooking, and washing, while charging a rising rate for anything used beyond that. This keeps water accessible to the poorest while still discouraging the kind of excessive consumption that leaves reservoirs empty.

In conclusion, I accept that no one should be denied clean water because of poverty, but a universally free supply is the wrong tool for enforcing that right. A basic free allowance paired with charges for excess use protects both the individual and the resource itself.

It is often said that clean water is a basic human need, and I agree that everyone deserves access to it. However, I do not think it should be provided completely free to every household, because this could lead people to waste a resource that is limited in many parts of the world.

Firstly, water is essential for life in the same way as food and shelter, so it makes sense to see it as a right rather than something only rich people can afford. Families who cannot pay for water often have to walk long distances to collect it, and children may miss school because of this. This shows how serious the problem is when water is treated only as a product to be sold, and why access to it should be guaranteed for everyone regardless of income.

On the other hand, if water is supplied for free to all homes, there is less reason for people to use it carefully, and the cost of running the system still has to be paid somehow, usually through taxes that everyone pays whether they use much water or not. A better solution might be to give each household a certain amount of water free every month, enough for basic needs like drinking and washing, and then charge for any extra amount used. This way, poorer families are still protected, but people are encouraged not to waste water unnecessarily.

In conclusion, while I believe water is a human right that should be protected, I do not think making it entirely free is the best way to do this. A limited free supply combined with charges for higher use seems a more balanced approach.

Water is very important for people to live, and I agree that it should be seen as a human right. But I don't fully agree that it should be free for every house, because this might cause some problems with how the water is managed.

It is true that many poor families cannot pay for water, and this is a big problem for them. They have to travel far away to get water or use dirty water, which can make them sick. So I think governments should make sure that everyone has access to clean water no matter how much money they have, because this is something all people need to survive.

However, giving water for free to everyone also has some disadvantages. If people don't pay for water, they might not care about using too much of it, and this can be bad in places where water is not easy to find. Also, someone still has to pay for the water system to work properly, like the pipes and workers, so the government would need to get this money from other taxes instead. I think it would be better if people got a small amount of water free each month, and then had to pay if they used more than that.

In conclusion, I think access to water is a human right, but making it completely free for everyone is not a good idea. A free amount for basic use, with payment for extra water, would be a fairer system for both people and the environment.

Water is important for all people and I agree it is a human right. Everyone need clean water to live a healthy life. But I think it should not be totally free for every home because this can create some other problem.

Some families are very poor and they cannot pay for water. This is not fair because water is basic need like food. If they don't have money, they cannot get clean water and they can become sick or have to travel long way for get it. For example, in some poor country, children cannot go to school because they must walk far every morning to bring water for their family, this is very common problem. So government must help these people to have water.

But if water is free for everyone, then people will use too much water and not think about saving it. Also the government need money to make the water clean and to fix the pipe when it break. If nobody pay, the government cannot do this job good, and the water system will become worse over time. Maybe it is better that people get free water for basic use like cooking and drink, but if they use more they must pay for it. This way is more fair for rich and poor family.

In conclusion, I agree that water is a right for people, but I don't agree it should be totally free for everyone. Government should give free water for basic amount and charge for extra use, this is more fair way I think.