GCSE English Language P2: Q5 🎤

Speech to local council

Last week, I wrote an article on how to answer question four of the second English Language paper.

This week, I’m covering how to answer Q5, the last question which is worth half of the marks for this paper.

Again, here’s the insert and the question paper. I’m using the latest June 2023 paper. Additionally, here is the mark scheme for this paper which you might wish to read also.

I would encourage you to attempt this task yourself after reading my guidance and model, and I would be happy to provide some free feedback on your writing if you were to send me your speech.

Q5

‘Cars are convenient, comfortable and save time. However, we need to use them less by making public transport such as trains, trams and buses cheaper, more reliable and easier to access.’

Write a speech to be given at a meeting of your local council in which you argue your point of view on this statement.

(24 marks for content and organisation 16 marks for technical accuracy)

[40 marks]

Guidance

1. In your planning note down the following: practical suggestions or actions for your audience to implement, anecdotes (stories) that you can tell to illustrate your argument(s), and a vision of the wonderful future you hope to realize through your initiatives.

2. Really consider your audience and the form of your writing. Your piece should sound like a speech and hit the right level of formality for a public council meeting.

3. You should also consider what your audience can achieve. Many students for this task would go into a Greta Thunberg style diatribe about climate action and the potential devastating global consequences of not reducing greenhouse emissions, but why would you abuse your local council like this? Remember they have limited control or power over national, let alone international climate action.

4. Utilise a range of rhetorical devices such as anecdote, facts and statistics, emotive language, contrast and different types of repetition as I model. A brief note on made-up facts and statistics: all of the ‘facts’ that I include are invented, but I’ve made an effort to make them sound convincing by not making them too extreme. This is what I would encourage you to do. Try to focus less on winning the argument with stupid, made-up facts and focus more on hitting the right tone.

5. Utilise a range of sentence structures and punctuation in a way which improves the flow of your speech and gives it a surging, forward momentum.

Response

Good afternoon, councillors and members of the public. My name is John Harrington, and I’m a local Chiswick resident representing Climate Action. As members of this community, I’m sure you’re all keen to reduce traffic congestion, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak before you today to offer some practical suggestions on behalf of Climate Action to reduce both traffic congestion and, by extension, carbon emissions.

First, I’d like to share an experience I had taking the bus recently– one I’m sure many of you can relate to. I was catching the R58 to Hammersmith and using my trusted app for navigating the city, City Mapper, to track its arrival: it’s 10 minutes away, then 5 minutes away, then 2 minutes away, then 1 minute away. Another minute passes. And another. And another. And then, it’s gone. The bus that presumably existed a minute ago has just vanished. This happens several times until I finally decide to take an alternative route, unsure if the bus is even running. And as I wait at a new bus stop, I realize by now I would have already reached my destination had I just walked.

These frustrating experiences severely affect the public’s trust in and motivation to use public transport, even for shorter journeys across town. They’re made even more frustrating because we trust the data on our apps to be accurate. People generally don’t mind waiting, so long as they know how long they’ll have to wait. That’s why we believe one of the most effective steps that local communities and Transport for London can take is to improve communication through the number and accuracy of live updates across the transport network.

If members of the public know when to walk or take an alternative route, they’ll be far less frustrated with the network. They’ll also be more likely to continue using public transport in the future and less likely to rely on cars. This, we believe, would be the most cost-effective step to increasing public transport use in the short term. It has the added benefit of improving public satisfaction with the network, which, according to the polls we’ve reviewed, is at its lowest since records began. This is largely due to the record number of strikes after the COVID lockdowns and the significant increase in the cost of fares during the same period.

However, we also believe that more substantial investment will be needed in both the short and long-term, especially in our bus service. While on average there may be more frequent buses and even new routes, there is a lack of consistency that must be significantly improved. We at Climate Action, after conducting focus groups and polling the local community, have concluded that reducing congestion requires increasing the number and frequency of buses and trains. Reducing carbon emissions demands a two-pronged approach: while some initiatives introduced by the current mayor of London have reduced congestion, simply making driving less attractive isn’t enough. We also need to ensure that public transport is made more attractive, accessible, and convenient. This is the only way to guarantee an increased uptake in public transport usage.

Raising the associated costs of driving—through increased parking permit fees, meter rates, and congestion charges—may seem like an attractive short-term solution. However, these actions alone often leave people feeling as if they’re being unfairly priced out of driving, which leads to resentment, often expressed online. In our busy, packed lives, people need to trust that they can get to work on time, pick up their children from school on time, and make doctor’s appointments without worrying about severe delays. We drive, not because it’s significantly more comfortable, but because we know roughly how long it will take to get from A to B. That’s why we believe that we should focus on encouraging public transport use rather than merely discouraging car use, especially as the public’s approval for TfL is at an all time low.

That’s not to say we’re advocating for people to stop buying cars or driving altogether. Our primary aim in the short to medium-term is to encourage more people to take public transport for shorter, local journeys. This starts with buses and ensuring they are reliable and regular enough that people prefer to take the bus across town or between boroughs.

After liaising with Transport for London and conducting interviews with bus drivers and the recruitment department, our studies conclude that more investment is needed in both the recruitment and retention of bus drivers. Retention, in particular, is a primary issue. TfL data reveals that over 50% of bus drivers quit within their first two years of employment. Additionally, before drivers quit, they often take an increasing number of sick days and unauthorized absences. This leads to missed services: your bus simply doesn’t turn up—as I’m sure many of you have experienced—and it puts greater strain on those buses that are running.

To improve retention, we recommend a 5% increase in salaries and bonuses for drivers working during peak time. The salary for a bus driver is significantly lower than that of a train driver, yet bus drivers are far more likely to face abuse from the public. They are four times as likely to be verbally abused and twice as likely to be physically assaulted. It’s an incredibly taxing, public-facing role that’s often under-appreciated.

Put simply, if drivers aren’t paid a comfortable, living wage, retention will continue to be a problem. This in turn will lead to more disruption and more delays. Incentivizing drivers with bonuses during peak times will ensure more drivers are on the road and remain within the profession long term. Trust in the bus service will quickly be restored, which will encourage more people to opt for public transport. If services are improved—in the region of 10–15%, according to our estimates—within five years, up to 10% more households may use public transport as their primary mode of transportation. Even households that own cars will opt for public transport for trips within a two-mile radius. This combination will lead to a significant reduction in congestion across Chiswick which will, of course, reduce carbon emissions.

There won’t be bumper-to-bumper traffic on the high street or outside our schools. Imagine, instead of suffocating in your car as you idle in traffic, emitting toxic fumes into the atmosphere and enduring the blaring horns of other despairing drivers, you hear birds chirping in the trees and the lovely sound of the hydraulics on a big red bus pulling up on schedule. And that bus then takes you across town faster than it would take you to drive, unimpeded by traffic down the designated bus lane.