Y09W41WR Should Reliable Internet Access Be a Basic Right?

Part 1

How to Write

Persuasive – Submission

A persuasive submission argues for a clear position on an issue and aims to influence a specific decision-maker. It is written for a formal audience — often a committee, council or leadership group — and must be credible and well-reasoned. The tone should be confident and respectful, demonstrating careful thinking about the issue.

  • Ideas & content: Take a clear position and develop it with logical, well-supported reasons. Acknowledge complexity where it exists, but always return to your core argument.
  • Structure & cohesion: Open with your position, develop your reasons in a logical order and close with a clear recommendation. Use connecting language to move from point to point smoothly.
  • Voice & audience: Write for your specific audience — formal, measured and credible. Avoid emotional exaggeration. Show you understand the issue from multiple sides, even while arguing one position.
  • Language choices: Use precise, formal vocabulary. Control modality carefully — words like should, must and strongly recommends signal conviction. Vary sentence structure for impact.
  • Conventions: Spell key terms correctly. Use punctuation to manage complex sentences. Check that your sentences are as clear as they are persuasive.

Common pitfalls: Arguing from passion alone without evidence or reasoning — a good submission shows logical thinking, not just strong feeling. Failing to acknowledge the other side even briefly, which makes your argument look one-sided.

Part 2

Your Task Plan for Today

The brief

Question: Write a submission to the organisation arguing for or against formally recognising reliable internet access as a basic right for all Australians. Take a clear position, support it with reasoning and address at least one argument on the other side. Your submission will be included in the organisation’s published report.

Stimulus: A human rights organisation is consulting on whether reliable internet access should be formally recognised as a basic right for all Australians, and whether the government therefore has an obligation to ensure universal access - including in remote and regional areas where commercial providers have not invested in infrastructure. Advocates argue that internet access is now essential for education, employment, healthcare and civic participation, and that lack of access deepens existing inequality. Critics argue that classifying internet access as a right would create unsustainable government obligations, and that targeted subsidies are a more appropriate mechanism than a rights-based framework.

Task Analysis: This task asks you to argue a clear position to an audience with real decision-making power. A strong response will take a definite stand, support it with specific reasoning that goes beyond personal preference, and acknowledge the strongest argument on the other side.

Quick Plan

Before you write, plan:

  • Your position — clearly stated
  • 2–3 reasons with specific detail, not just claims
  • The strongest opposing argument and your response
  • Your call to action — exactly what you want your audience to do

Thesis / position

State your position clearly from the opening. Your audience needs to know exactly where you stand before reading your reasoning. A submission to decision-makers should be direct — they are reading many responses.

Evidence chain

For each reason, develop it fully with specific detail. If you argue about community impact, explain specifically what that means for your community. Developed reasoning is far more persuasive than a list of claims.

Counterargument

Acknowledge the main argument on the other side and explain why your position is more compelling despite that argument. Show your audience that you have considered multiple perspectives.

Credibility & tone

Write as someone who cares about this issue and has thought seriously about it. Be respectful to your audience and to people who disagree with you. Credibility comes from fairness and careful reasoning, not aggression.

Call to action

Close with a clear, direct statement of what you want your audience to decide or do. Name exactly what you are asking for and why it is the right choice.