Some think that private companies should pay for pollution clean up, while others say it should be a government’s responsibility.
Discuss, and state your own opinion.
Sample 1 Answer:
With the rapid industrialization, pollution clean-up has become a debatable issue in the world. Some people think that the government has to pay for pollution control measures, whereas others say that pollution clean-up is the sole responsibility of private organizations. This essay discusses both perspectives and gives an opinion for the same.
Needless to say, private industries have a major contribution to cause air, water, and soil pollution. Therefore, commoners have the perspective that private companies are responsible for depleting Mother nature therefore they should pay for the pollution control as well. Since it becomes their social duty, so they should not consider it as a liability on their budget. Moreover, it is observed that most of the manufacturing units do not even consider establishing their wastewater treatment plants. By doing so, they can at least, reduce the toxic contaminants from the wastewater before releasing it. So here again, they are accused of aggravating the environmental conditions.
Whereas, others think that the government must pay for the pollution clean-up procedures because it is already collecting heavy revenues from the private firms in the form of taxes every year. So, authorities can easily take up these measures. Furthermore, setting up the treatment plants costs very high to the independent firms because they already have the burden of monitoring production rate, paying wages, electricity bills, and so on. Therefore, without support from the government, it is a daunting task for private corporations.
In conclusion, I believe that collaborative efforts from government and private companies are the need of the hour to alleviate the risk of environmental menace.
Sample 2 Answer:
Pollution is not a national but a global problem. The contaminated air and water cause many diseases in humans and animals. One school of thought holds that nonpublic corporations must bear the cost of clearing out pollutants, whereas opponents reckon that administration should be held responsible for the same. This essay will discuss both the aforementioned views and provide a logical conclusion at the end.
On the one hand, non-government firms are actually the primary source of pollution so they are liable to deal with it. Such factories release harmful effluents into the nearby water bodies or in the open air with a devil-may-care attitude. They audaciously disregard the environmental laws as they know that they can get away due to corruption. Taxes should be levied on such private businesses ruining the harmony of nature so that the money raised can be used for the betterment of the environment. Also, they should treat the harmful gases or toxic waste products to make them less harmful, if found breaching the laws, they should be heavily penalised.
On the other hand, the regime represents people and also is responsible for the effective implementation and functioning of law. Governments without any loopholes must make sure that no private company breaks the law and pollutes the ecosystem. When governance is corrupt, nonpublic establishments make misuse of it and contaminate the surroundings in the quest of earning illegal profit. For instance, some self-owned firms use poor quality fuel for the production which is cheaper that helps them gain more benefits but creates a lot of pollutants to degrade the air, soil and water quality. They do so because they know that they can escape by bribing the concerned government officials.
To sum up, I staunchly believe that one who makes a mess is supposed to clean it up in the first place. However, without proper as well as scrutinised surveillance and working of governing bodies, the polluters will not pay heed to the guidelines or regulations formed for environmental protection. Hence both play an equivalent role in ensuring environmental safety.
Vocabulary:
Reckon: to believe
Liable: responsible for something
effluents: waste from industry thrown into water resources
Devil-may-care: a person who does not care about the results of actions
Audaciously: someone who take risks by his/her will
Corruption: dishonest behaviour by people who are in authority
Levied: the amount of tax imposed on a commodity by government
Harmony: a condition in which people live in a peaceful atmosphere
Penalised: to punish someone for break law
Regime: a particular government
Loopholes: a deficiency in something that can help people to do unlawful things
Degrade: destroy the quality of something
Staunchly: strongly
scrutinised: a careful examination for retrieve information
Heed: attention
