The quote highlights a fundamental aspect of social welfare systems—universality. When services or provisions are considered a public responsibility, it signifies a collective approach to addressing societal needs. This paradigm ensures that no individual is left behind merely due to their economic status or personal circumstances, fostering a sense of shared commitment and solidarity within a community. However, the phrase also hints at the dual nature of such approaches: while they aim for inclusivity, they can also carry drawbacks or inefficiencies. The acknowledgment that 'for good and ill' these provisions are seen as a public trouble emphasizes that collective responsibility is not a perfect solution—there may be resources misallocated, bureaucratic obstacles, or unintended consequences. Nonetheless, this universal approach signifies a societal consensus that access to essential needs like healthcare, education, and welfare should not be privileges but basic rights. Such a stance is vital for social cohesion, reducing inequality, and promoting a more equitable society. Historically, many nations have grappled with balancing universal provision against the costs and challenges it entails. Recognizing that these provisions reflect a collective moral obligation can act as a foundation for ongoing debates about the extent and nature of social services. It raises questions about the responsibilities we have toward each other and the importance of ensuring that social systems remain inclusive and sustainable over time. Essentially, the quote encapsulates a vision of community and collective accountability—an inspiring reminder of what societies can strive for amid the complexities of public policy and social justice.