Government Should Not Put Money into Building Theaters and Sports Stadiums - IELTS Task 2 Band 9 Sample Essay

Achieve your dream score with our detailed IELTS eBooks - your complete guide!

Model Essay 1

As societies debate how public funds should be allocated, some argue that governments ought to stop investing in theatres and sports stadiums and instead prioritise healthcare and education. I strongly agree with this view to a large extent. While cultural and sporting infrastructure has value, core public services such as medical care and education deserve far greater funding because they underpin social stability and long-term national development.

The most compelling reason to prioritise healthcare and education is that they address fundamental human needs and generate far-reaching benefits. Adequate investment in medical services directly saves lives, reduces preventable diseases, and ensures a productive workforce. In many countries, underfunded hospitals struggle with outdated equipment and staff shortages, problems that no amount of cultural spending can compensate for. Similarly, education is a powerful engine of social mobility and economic growth. Well-funded schools and universities produce skilled citizens who can innovate, pay taxes, and contribute meaningfully to society. For example, nations that consistently invest in teacher training and research institutions tend to enjoy higher productivity and lower inequality. From this perspective, diverting scarce public money toward entertainment venues appears ethically questionable when basic services remain inadequate.

That said, it would be overly simplistic to argue that governments should entirely abandon spending on theatres and stadiums. Cultural and sporting facilities can foster national identity, social cohesion, and even economic activity through tourism and employment. However, such investments should be conditional and proportionate. Lavish stadium projects often benefit a narrow segment of society while consuming enormous budgets, sometimes leading to long-term debt. In contrast, modest, well-planned cultural funding—especially when supported by private investment—can coexist with strong public services. Therefore, the issue is not whether arts and sports matter, but whether they should take precedence over essential services, which they should not.

In conclusion, although theatres and sports stadiums contribute to cultural life, governments should overwhelmingly prioritise spending on healthcare and education. These sectors address basic needs, promote equality, and secure sustainable national progress. Cultural investment is desirable, but only after the foundations of a healthy and educated society have been firmly established.

Achieve your dream score with our detailed IELTS eBooks - your complete guide!

Model Essay 2

As governments face competing demands on limited budgets, some contend that funding for theatres and sports stadiums should be curtailed in favour of healthcare and education. I completely disagree with this view. Public investment in cultural and sporting infrastructure is not a distraction from social progress but a strategic necessity, as it drives economic vitality and strengthens social cohesion—benefits that ultimately reinforce, rather than undermine, spending on health and education.

To begin with, theatres and sports stadiums are powerful economic catalysts that generate sustainable revenue and employment, enabling governments to fund essential services more effectively. Large-scale cultural and sporting venues create thousands of direct and indirect jobs, ranging from construction and maintenance to tourism, hospitality, and creative industries. For instance, cities that host major sporting events or internationally recognised cultural festivals often experience long-term growth in tourism and global visibility, expanding their tax base. This additional revenue can then be reinvested into hospitals and schools. By contrast, viewing such infrastructure as a financial burden ignores its multiplier effect. Far from competing with healthcare and education, these projects can act as engines that finance them, making public spending more self-sustaining and less reliant on taxation or foreign aid.

Moreover, investment in theatres and stadiums plays a crucial social role that healthcare and education alone cannot fulfil. Cultural and sporting spaces promote mental well-being, civic pride, and social integration, all of which are indispensable in modern, high-pressure societies. Regular access to arts and sports has been shown to reduce stress, combat social isolation, and encourage healthy lifestyles, thereby lowering long-term healthcare costs. Additionally, these venues often function as shared public spaces where people from diverse backgrounds interact, fostering national unity. Education may shape the intellect, and healthcare may preserve the body, but culture and sport nurture emotional resilience and collective identity. Neglecting this dimension risks producing societies that are technically competent yet socially fragmented.

In conclusion, I firmly oppose the idea that governments should divert funding away from theatres and sports stadiums. Such infrastructure stimulates economic growth and cultivates social well-being, both of which indirectly support stronger healthcare and education systems. A truly forward-looking government recognises that cultural investment is not a luxury, but a cornerstone of holistic national development.

Achieve your dream score with our detailed IELTS eBooks - your complete guide!