There is no excuse for authorities to restrict the unpaid public rights-education and healthcare.

All education and healthcare should be founded by the government and free everyone.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

It is common truth that state tends to have a set of crucial obligation to the citizens who live in a state under control of formal leader-president. One of that condition is that government must gurantee the education and health care as free facilities which can be exactly used by all of everyone. The argument why must be implemented is that government takes a taxation as inhabitan's obligation. According to that asumption, I argue that authorities of national education and health department should widely make the tuition and healtcare as a self-governing for the national subjects.

Based on the welfare state indicators published by OECD, it can be noticed that a country can be evaluated as well-being nations of which is able to warranty the life aspect of all of people. Particularly in educational and health right. Indeed, in Indonesia context, UUD or the basic law of Indonesia introduces clearly that a regime as important figure was obligated to preserve the unemployments, paupers and waifs. They have a common right as same as with other social class such as education and healthcare. In this context the reason is able to accept a cohesive altercation. The notion obviously declared the state commitment to education and healthcare as unpaid faciltities, eventually, based on the two main foundation-legal such the basic law of Indonesia and normative argument as main function of state.

In conclusion, it is certainly not excuse for authority to restrict the unpaid public rights-education and healthcare. Not only as obligation, but also as social and success indicators a regime of developed-country.

Sholihin, first things first. Your opening statement is confused, does not use the correct word descriptors for your essay and lacks a coherent message. Before you use the term "state" in description of a government, use the term "government" first. After all, the keyword used in the prompt is "government" and not state. it is imperative that you show the reviewer that you know how to use the keywords that were provided to you in the correct context. At the moment, your essay does not do that.

Self-governing means that the people do not need to heed the government orders and they do not need the govcernment's help in doing anything. Since what you are trying to say is that the government should "subsidize" the education and health needs of the people, meaning the government should make it free by paying for the services the people need, you cannot use the term "self-governing".

Now, going back to the opening statement, it is flawed because it does not accurately portray the line of reasoning or discussion in the essay prompt. You immediately open with your opinion discussion, which is a big mistake since it does not follow the correct essay format for the IELTS test. The opening statement should contain the following:

1. Restated prompt
2. Opposing view summary
3. Supporting view summary
4. Your opinion summary.

Then you can move on to the actual discussion. The conclusion is also wrong in the sense that you need at least 3 sentences to properly explain, summarize, and present your opinion on the topic again. The one that you wrote is not acceptable.