Introduction and summary
"HS2 must be built in full, say the CBI's regional heads" is about the request to the UK government to built the controversial HS2 rail to the North from London. The article says that six regional heads of Britain's biggest employers' group are worried about a fate of the HS2 rail project because there is a possibility that all or part of the high-speed rail network might be scrapped.
The opinion was claimed this project has delays and uncertainties, and it will not improve the desired connectivity across the country. Moreover a lot of money have already been spent and will have to spend more in a future for two phases of HS2.
However, the CBI chiefs consider that the HS2 rail project will bring more benefits to local communities far beyond its costs. Northern leaders have suggested in a review recommendations about a nessesarity of taking control of plans for the HS2 rail.
____________________________________
Response: What is your opinion?
I agree with the CBI chiefs about future benefits from the HS2 rail project for people, bisinesses and the UK in a whole. Every huge and extra expensive project needs in a strict control of workers, time-management, finanses, and compliance of laws, standarts. Only regular revisions and making adjustments to the construction process can help to achieve the best results with minimum of losing.
____________________________________
Thank you Sofia, but the instructions say that the summary must be "120 words or less." 206 is way over that limit, and that would be a serious problem in an exam. I made the maximum 120 words to challenge you to both make careful decisions on what was important enough to include in your summary and to then connect those main ideas in a two or three sentences.
ReplyDeleteBut as in IELTS, where the writing task 2 where you give your own opinion is 250 words or more, we expect your response to be significantly longer than the summary here.
Although it was not an article I would have chosen to read myself, your summary effectively shows why it would interest many readers of the BBC, who are British.
Although I think that trains are an important infrastructue for transportation, I'm not sure that they should be built or run by governments, and if trains are to compete with planes today, they need to be fast. I think that most people would prefer to fly in a few hours rather than sit on a train for days. In Australia, the Indian-Pacific train that goes from Sydney to Perth, across over 3,000 miles of Australia, takes three days to make the trip, and that is a long time to be on a train. On the other hand, you do get a better view of the passing landscape from a train, and have time to enjoy it, which I guess is why some people still like to take trains. I prefer to fly, but when I look down from a few kilometres up at the Australian desert landscape below me, it does look beautiful in its shades of reds, so maybe I should take the train once to enjoy it close up.
Thanks for an interesting post on a different topic.
I will reduce my article to 120 words. When I have unlimited time sometimes I become too absorbed by a process and write more than needed.
ReplyDeleteAbout trains... Of course this train is planned to be very fast. There is a really small distance between London and Manchester - just 200 miles. Also don`t forget about compulsory extra time in an airport before a flight. Because of that to use a train for small distances is easier and faster than using a plane. Sure a plan is the best choice for far travelling, here I agree with you.
Sofia, don't worry about reducing this one. It's the first go to learn how to do it, and unlike the Rugby World Cup rules that Junko wrote about, we can be a bit more flexible.
Delete