Writing: Analysing urgency and commenting on individual recycling
Writing task: Candidates must analyse a fictional excerpt from a speech by a state minister at a youth climate summit and then write a comment. The excerpt reads: 'We have no choice. We have no time. We have no planet B. Every bottle you recycle is a vote for the future. But let me be clear: the big decisions are not made in your kitchen. They are made in this building, and we will make them.' The speech uses a three-part parallel structure, a metaphor ('vote'), and a shift from 'you' to 'we'. The task asks candidates to analyse how the speaker constructs urgency and then to comment on the claim that individual recycling is politically meaningful. The comment must refer to the excerpt and to one further example.
1. Write the topic sentence and two supporting sentences of an analysis paragraph on the three-part parallel structure. Explain what the structure does, not just what it is.
Read the worked answer
Topic sentence: The three-part parallel structure turns a policy argument into a crescendo of necessity. Supporting sentence one: The repeated 'We have no...' compresses choice, time and planet into a single threat, so each item seems to follow from the last. Supporting sentence two: The third item, 'no planet B', is not a factual claim but a rhetorical closure; it presents alternatives as already exhausted and prepares the contrast with 'But let me be clear'. The analysis should name anaphora and tricolon, then explain the effect: urgency, inevitability, and a narrowed frame in which disagreement looks irresponsible. This is stronger than saying only that the repetition emphasises the message.
2. How should the comment handle the shift from 'you' to 'we'? Propose a line of argument and identify the evidence you would cite.
Read the worked answer
The shift matters because it redistributes responsibility. 'You' is attached to recycling, a private act; 'we' is attached to 'this building' and 'we will make them', a public act. A good comment can argue that the shift is evasive: the speaker flatters the audience for individual virtue while claiming collective agency for government, without naming who 'we' is. Evidence to cite: 'the big decisions are not made in your kitchen' followed by 'we will make them'. A further example could be a deposit-return scheme or an urban speed limit, where policy changed behaviour more than individual choice did. The comment should evaluate whether the speech invites participation or substitutes applause for action.
3. The task requires 'one further example'. What makes an example useful here, and what would make it mere decoration?
Read the worked answer
A useful example tests the claim rather than illustrating it. It should be comparable, dated and sourced, and it should show whether individual recycling has political meaning beyond the act itself. For instance, a deposit-return scheme with a measurable return rate could show that individual behaviour matters when infrastructure changes. A decoration is a bare name-drop: 'Germany recycles a lot' or 'Sweden is green'. That repeats the claim without evidence. The example should also be linked back to the excerpt's distinction between kitchen and building, so the comment does not drift into a general essay.