I have rarely seen a task with so many parts to address. Generally, it seems that we must cover the following three areas: 

1) In a number of countries, explain why it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities.

2) Explain why large sums of money should be spent on improving existing public transport.

3) What is your opinion about this issue: Superfast trains or the existing public transport?

However, while addressing these three major parts, we must also keep an eye on the following parts to be able to write a full response for a high band: 

1) In a number of countries 

This phrase implies that the first view concerns only a few countries, not all countries. 

2) Necessary 

This word shows a level of urgency; perhaps some governments are sensing that they will face severe issues if they do not spend billions of dollars on developing superfast trains. The question is, what sort of problems are they predicting about which they seem so worried? Is it because their population will explode in the future (as is the case in China)? Is it because they want to dominate the world economy without endangering the environment? We need to think about these issues. 

3) Large sums of money

This phrase shows that we are dealing with billions of dollars; the same thing is reflected in the second view (the part that says “the money,” which refers to large sums of money).

4) constructing new railway lines for high-speed trains 

This phrase shows that we are dealing with new infrastructure. But what is it going to be used for? High-speed trains, superfast trains, bullet trains, Maglev Technologies, or other similar means can help increase efficiency (less wasting of time), which is essential in the economy and when governments want to encourage a train culture to curb high rates of car use. 

5) between cities

This phrase implies that we might only be dealing with connecting urban areas, unlike the second view, which can also include the transportation systems used inside cities (the phrase “public transport” is very general). 

Moreover, the second view does not seem to be about the same developed countries as those included in view 1. These countries (perhaps less developed ones) might have severe issues with their transportation now, so they do not have time to think about the future and the problems it will bring. They should revitalize their current system to survive the future life on earth. 

One major issue I find in IELTS candidates’ essays is that they change the essay's focus from government to people. Note that people do not directly build railways. The governments do. So, the focus of the essay should be on governments. For example, when we write that fast trains help me visit my aunt Cassidy 23 minutes faster than the time it takes me today using a regular train, we practically ignore many of the critical areas of the task. 

Thank you for reading this.