Write at least 250 words · 40 minutes
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Ideas to get you started
- Cleaner air and safer streets for pedestrians and cyclists
- Difficulties for disabled people, deliveries and small businesses
- Success depends on reliable public transport alternatives
A plan for this question
- Introduction: paraphrase the proposal and give your position: cars should be heavily restricted, but a complete ban goes too far.
- Body 1: the benefits of fewer cars: cleaner air, less noise, safer streets, space for people; an example of a pedestrian street.
- Body 2: the problems of a total ban: disabled and elderly people, deliveries and small businesses, weak public transport.
- Body 3: your alternative: charges, closed streets, exemptions and better public transport.
- Conclusion: restate your position.
Model essay
295 words
Traffic and pollution have led some planners to propose banning private cars from city centres altogether. While I agree that cars should be heavily restricted in these areas, I disagree with a complete ban, because some people genuinely depend on them.
There are strong reasons to reduce car traffic in city centres. Fewer cars mean cleaner air, less noise and safer streets, which makes the centre far more pleasant for pedestrians and cyclists. Space now used for roads and car parks could be turned into wider pavements, cycle lanes, trees and seating. Cities that have pedestrianised their main streets, such as Copenhagen with its long shopping street, Strøget, often find that people spend more time there, which can benefit shops and cafés.
However, a total ban would create real difficulties. Disabled and elderly people may be unable to use buses or walk long distances, and for them a car can be the only way to reach a hospital, a bank or a relative. Shops, restaurants and builders also need deliveries, and small businesses could lose customers who live outside the city and have no direct public transport link. Moreover, a ban would only work if buses and trains were frequent and reliable, which is not the case in many cities.
A better approach is to limit cars rather than ban them. Cities could charge drivers to enter the centre, close the busiest streets to traffic and allow exemptions for disabled drivers, emergency vehicles and deliveries at certain hours, while investing heavily in public transport.
In conclusion, although reducing car use in city centres would bring clear benefits, a complete ban would be unfair to people who rely on cars. Strict limits combined with better public transport would achieve most of the benefits without these costs.
Written by Acedmi to show what a high-band essay looks like. It is not an official IELTS sample, and your own ideas can be different.
Useful vocabulary
- pedestrian / pedestrianised
- A person walking / closed to cars so people can walk.
- “The main street has been pedestrianised.”
- restrict
- Limit.
- “Cars should be restricted in the city centre.”
- ban
- Officially stop something completely.
- “A total ban would hurt some residents.”
- exemption
- Permission not to follow a rule.
- “Disabled drivers would need an exemption.”
- emergency vehicles
- Ambulances, fire engines and police cars.
- “Emergency vehicles must always have access.”
- depend on
- Need something to manage.
- “Some elderly people depend on their cars.”
- reliable
- Working well every time.
- “Public transport must be reliable before cars are limited.”
- go too far
- Be more extreme than is reasonable.
- “A complete ban goes too far.”
Common mistakes
- Missing the word "completely" in the question. A partial position (limit, not ban) is fine, but say it clearly.
- Writing about traffic problems in general. Keep to the idea of banning private cars from city centres.
- Naming cities without explaining what they show. Say what the example proves, as the model does with Copenhagen.
What the examiner marks
Four criteria, equally weighted: Task Response (answer every part of the question with a clear position), Coherence and Cohesion (logical paragraphs and linking), Lexical Resource (range and accuracy of vocabulary) and Grammatical Range and Accuracy. An essay under 250 words loses marks for Task Response.