How to read the question

• This is an opinion essay: Do you agree or disagree requires a clear position in the introduction that stays the same through to the conclusion.
• The statement has two parts linked by therefore: a premise (clean water is a basic human right) and a conclusion (every home should get water free of charge). You can accept the premise but question whether the conclusion follows from it.
• Free of charge is the key phrase. The issue is not whether water should be affordable, but whether households should pay nothing at all, so your arguments must address cost, funding and use.
• Every home is absolute: it includes wealthy households that use large amounts of water for gardens and swimming pools, which is a useful point if you disagree or partly agree.
• A partial position works well, for example agreeing that a basic amount should be free while arguing that higher consumption should be paid for, as long as it is stated clearly.
• Avoid drifting into general discussions of water shortages, pollution or developing countries' infrastructure unless you link them directly to the question of free household supply.

Suggested position

Although I fully accept that clean water is a basic human right, I disagree that it should therefore be supplied free of charge to every home, since a free basic allowance combined with charges for higher use would protect both people and the resource itself.

Paragraph plan

1. 1

   Introduction

   Paraphrase the statement and give your position: accept that water is a human right, but disagree that all household water should be free, proposing a free basic allowance instead.

2. 2

   Body paragraph 1: the case for free water

   Acknowledge the strongest argument for the statement: water is essential for survival and hygiene, and high bills can force poor families to ration it, harming health, especially children's. Free water would remove this risk and reflect the principle that survival should not depend on income.

3. 3

   Body paragraph 2: why water should not be completely free

   Explain that treatment, pipes and maintenance are expensive, so free water would put the whole cost on taxpayers and could lead to underfunded, leaking networks. Add that free resources tend to be wasted, and that charges discourage heavy use during droughts. Then present the alternative: a free basic allowance with rising charges above it, as in South Africa.

4. 4

   Conclusion

   Restate that the right to water does not mean all water must be free, and that a free basic allowance plus charges for extra use best protects that right.

Ideas and arguments

• Water is essential for drinking, cooking and hygiene, so no one should be denied it because they cannot pay.
• High water bills can force low-income families to cut back on washing and sanitation, increasing the risk of disease.
• Supplying water involves large costs for reservoirs, treatment plants and pipe networks, which someone must pay for.
• If households pay nothing, the cost shifts to general taxation, and underfunded water companies may fail to repair leaks.
• People tend to waste resources they do not pay for, which is a serious problem in drought-prone regions.
• Charging for water allows governments to discourage non-essential uses such as filling swimming pools or watering large gardens.
• A free basic allowance, such as South Africa's free monthly amount of water per household, guarantees the right while still charging for heavy use.
• Social tariffs or subsidies for low-income households can protect the poor without making water free for the wealthy.

Band 8+ model answer

295 words · An original model answer written for ieltswrites, not an official answer. It stays in English, as in the exam.

Why this answer scores highly

Task Response

The essay separates the premise from the conclusion, takes a clear position of disagreement, fairly acknowledges the opposing view, and develops a specific alternative that is maintained through to the conclusion.

Coherence and Cohesion

Each paragraph has one clear focus, moving from the case for free water to the case against and then to a solution, and devices such as however, moreover and this ensures that link ideas without being mechanical.

Lexical Resource

Precise vocabulary such as ration, general taxation, underfunded networks, a fixed monthly allowance and rising rates is used naturally, and the key terms of the question are paraphrased.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy

The essay uses conditional sentences, passive forms, relative clauses and concessive structures such as although and while accurately and with a natural variety of sentence lengths.

Useful vocabulary

a basic human right

something every person should have simply because they are human

free of charge

without any payment

access to clean water

the ability to obtain safe water for drinking and washing

water supply

the system that provides water to homes, or the water it provides

sanitation

systems for keeping places clean and healthy, such as toilets and sewers

ration

limit how much of something is used because there is not enough

infrastructure

the basic systems a country needs, such as pipes, roads and power lines

general taxation

money raised from taxes and used for public spending as a whole

underfunded

not given enough money to work properly

consumption

the amount of something that people use

drought-prone

likely to suffer long periods without rain

a free basic allowance

a fixed amount of something that each person or household receives without paying

rising tariffs

prices that increase as people use more

it does not follow that

a phrase used to show that one idea does not logically lead to another

Common mistakes

• Arguing only that water is a human right, which the statement already assumes, without discussing whether it should be free of charge.
• Giving a vague position such as there are advantages and disadvantages, without saying clearly whether you agree or disagree.
• Writing mainly about water pollution or global water shortages instead of the question of free household supply.
• Ignoring the cost of providing water and assuming it would cost nothing if households did not pay.
• Using invented statistics, such as claims that free water would reduce disease by 80%, which weaken rather than strengthen the argument.
• Repeating the words water and free throughout instead of paraphrasing with terms such as supply, charges, at no cost and consumption.

Frequently asked questions

Which Cambridge book is this question from?

This question about whether every home should have free water because clean water is a basic human right is Writing Task 2 of Test 1 in Cambridge IELTS 20 Academic.

Can I agree that water is a right but disagree that it should be free?

Yes, and this is often the strongest approach. The statement links the two ideas with therefore, so you can accept the first idea and explain why the second does not necessarily follow, as long as your overall position is clear.

What examples can I use for this essay?

Useful examples include drought restrictions on watering gardens, the cost of treatment plants and pipe repairs, and South Africa's policy of giving each household a free basic amount of water every month.

How many words should I write for this Task 2?

Write at least 250 words; about 270-310 words is usually enough to develop your argument fully in 40 minutes.