speech on public service

clock This article was published more than  11 years ago

A great speech on why to go into public service

Tom Fox is a guest writer for On Leadership and vice president for leadership and innovation at the nonprofit Partnership for Public Service. He also heads up their Center for Government Leadership.

Can you remember the exact moment you chose to go into public service?

Bill Corr, the deputy secretary at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), asked that question earlier this month to 75 graduates of a leadership training and development program run by the Center for Government Leadership.

Speaking to the group of GS-14s and GS-15s, Corr talked about the important role played by career civil servants, the challenges and obstacles they face, and the opportunities available to be innovative and serve the nation.

Corr said he signed up for government service because he wanted to help people, and knew those in the room felt the same way. His passion and message hit home for the graduating class, and served as a strong reminder that working for the government is not just about getting a paycheck, but about the mission and making a difference.

Below are excerpts from Corr’s remarks to the graduates:

GET CAUGHT UP

70 years later, 1 in 3 Black people say integration didn’t help Black students

Journalists sue Chicago Tribune owner alleging pay discrimination

Abbott grants Daniel Perry pardon in murder of Black Lives Matter protester

NFL disavows Harrison Butker’s comments, cites commitment to inclusion

6 Airbnb red flags to spot before you make a booking mistake

“I’ve been in government long enough to know that as GS-14s and GS-15s your effectiveness can determine whether our government succeeds and whether it meets its obligation to the public. While the political appointees help determine which direction we go in, it’s up to the career leaders to actually get us there. As leaders in the civil service, you set the tone for thousands of employees who look to you for guidance and inspiration. You are the key to whether our government does a good job for our people, and that is a lofty responsibility.

Public service has never faced as stern a test as it does today. People are watching our government, and with this challenge comes an opportunity. People are thirsty for quality government. They want to be reminded of that distinctly American feeling that theirs is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, a government that works for them. They want leaders like you who stand up and make our government stand out.

I’m so pleased to see how motivated the 75 graduates in this room are because you have leadership responsibility. I know how motivated career employees can be. In fact, when I became deputy secretary at HHS, my first job was to identify a senior leadership team that could match the energy and enthusiasm of our career employees. We told them that the people who work here through every administration are committed to our mission, ‘If you are a senior leader, you’ve got to lead and you’ve got to be at the top of your game because they are.’

I hope you will take your energy, your motivation, your desire to serve your country, and inject it into your departments as your careers progress. Be the leaders that you’ve always wanted to see in your government. Be the leaders that the American people expect you to be. Don’t wait for others to create the next great government program or come up with the next great innovation, and don’t lose the spirit of service that brought you here in the first place.

I bet everyone in this room can remember the moment when you decided to go into public service. For me it came shortly after law school when I was directing four community-owned health care centers in the Appalachian Mountains of Eastern Tennessee and Southeastern Kentucky. My four years working with those community health centers shaped my commitment to public service and my lifelong interest in health and human services issues. I came to Washington with the intention of staying for two years. I wanted to find out if this was a place where I could make a real and lasting difference for the American people, and for the lives of those people who came into those health centers in East Tennessee. That was 36 years ago this month.

I’ve spent 18 years as a staff member in the Congress, nine years at HHS and I wouldn’t trade one day for the opportunities and for the rewards that have come from that service.

We each have different stories about how we got into public service, and I’m sure there’s a variety of motivations about why we are here now, but we’ve all made a common discovery. We are in an arena where real change can happen. It is an arena where real leadership matters. It is an arena where a good idea can touch the lives of millions of Americans.”

Does Corr’s speech resonate with you? In the comments section, tell us why you chose public service and how you believe your work is making a difference. You can also send me an email at [email protected].

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

‘I haven’t really had a proper weekend in a long time’

Party like it’s 2020

Study of Psychedelics in Society and Culture announces funding recipients

“Don’t let your generation be defined by the pandemic,” said U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland. “Let it be defined by public service.”

Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard Staff Photographer

A call to public service

Christina Pazzanese

Harvard Staff Writer

Merrick Garland tells grads to get involved, warns democracy in peril, cites Capitol attack, rise in mass shootings, stifling of voting rights

The Classes of 2020 and 2021 finally got their day under the trees of Tercentenary Theatre Sunday morning, having missed out on the pageantry and rituals of Commencement after the pandemic forced graduations online over the past two years.

For the University’s second Commencement in four days, nearly 9,000 of the graduates RSVP’d their plans to return to Cambridge for the full cap-and-gown experience and to hear featured speaker U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland ’74, J.D. ’77 make a plea for more to embrace public service for at least some part of their lives at a time when the nation’s democratic institutions face historic threat.

“Don’t let your generation be defined by the pandemic,” he said in an address that was both personal and often impassioned. “Let it be defined by public service.”

A longtime public servant himself, Garland, 69, spent decades as a top Justice Department official and federal judge before President Barack Obama nominated him to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2016 following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, only to see his nomination blocked by Senate Republicans. (“Life doesn’t always turn out the way you expect,” Garland joked. “Trust me on that.”) He was sworn in as President Biden’s pick for Attorney General in March 2021.

Garland touched on the three recent mass shootings, calling them “horrific attack[s]” by gunmen in Uvalde, Texas; Laguna Woods, California; and Buffalo, New York. “These tragedies only underscore how urgent the call to public service for your generation truly is,” he said.

While there are many ways to serve and many problems to resolve, the ongoing threats to democracy and democratic institutions, both in the U.S. and abroad, make the need for broad participation “especially urgent,” he said.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a clear threat that should unify Americans and their international allies. In the U.S., democracy is being imperiled by efforts to undermine the right to vote and violence and threats of violence toward people “because of who they are or how they serve the public,” whether it’s on an airplane or in a restaurant or administering local elections, serving on a school board, or working as a journalist, he said.

“In a democracy, people vote, argue, and debate — often loudly — in order to achieve the policy outcome, they desire,” he said. “But the promise of democracy is that people will not employ violence to affect that outcome.”

“Sending you home in March of 2020 is one of the hardest things I have ever done,” President Larry Bacow told the graduating Classes of 2020 and 2021. “Thank you all for … giving us the opportunity to provide you with the proper sendoff that you so richly deserve.”

Jon Chase/Harvard Staff Photographer

Decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court over the last decade have “significantly weakened” many of the “important tools” that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 gave the Justice Department to protect the rights of eligible voters from racially discriminatory practices, he said.

Since then, there’s been a “dramatic increase” in legislation to make it harder for “millions of eligible voters” to cast ballots and choose their representatives. “Those efforts threaten the foundation of our system of government — and there may be worse to come,” he said, noting talk among Republican politicians to give state legislatures the power to set aside the choice of voters.

“When I was sitting where you are sitting today,” he told the graduates, “there were many things to worry about, but it never occurred to me that the right to vote would again be threatened in this country.”

Garland spoke of the dangers of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, which took place as Congress prepared to certify the vote count of the Electoral College. The “proceedings were disrupted for hours, interfering with a fundamental element of American democracy: the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next.”

He drew a straight line between the Department of Justice’s original mission — to combat white supremacists, like the Ku Klux Klan, who used violence to prevent Black Americans from voting and exercising other constitutionally protected rights — and the Department’s ongoing prosecution of those involved in the Capitol attack.

“A democracy cannot survive if its citizens forsake the rule of law in favor of violence or threats of violence,” he said. “We are all in this together. We must protect each other.”

He reiterated remarks he made in January, saying prosecutors would “hold accountable everyone who was criminally responsible for the Jan. 6 assault on our democracy.” Garland has drawn criticism for what some perceive as the department’s focus on low-level attackers and not on White House or Trump campaign officials.

The House Select Committee investigating the assault will hold public hearings next month.

Resilience and relief were top of mind for graduates and administrators alike.

“Sending you home in March of 2020 is one of the hardest things I have ever done. At the time, I never imagined that the pandemic would disrupt campus life for close to two years and would necessitate canceling not one, but two Commencements,” President Larry Bacow told the happy graduates and their elated family members. “Thank you all for … giving us the opportunity to provide you with the proper sendoff that you so richly deserve.”

“Your time as students — though not what you would have wished, though not what any of us would have wished for you — coincided with this institution at its best. We were reminded of something that has been true of Harvard since its earliest days: We rise to the challenge. Whatever the world throws at us, we meet that challenge, and you did. I could not be prouder of each and every one of you.”

The 2020 and 2021 Commencement speakers, Martin Baron, former executive editor of The Washington Post, and Ruth Simmons, Ph.D. ’73, president of Prairie View A&M University in Texas and a leading voice in higher education, were also on hand. Baron received an honorary degree awarded to him in 2021. Joining him were the other 2021 honorands: Arlie Hochschild, University of California at Berkeley sociologist; Margaret Marshall M.Ed ’69, retired chief justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court; Sebastião Salgado, Brazilian photojournalist and documentary filmmaker; and Anna Deavere Smith, award-winning actor and playwright.

In a break from tradition, one student from each School thanked the many people, especially Harvard staff and faculty members, who worked diligently throughout the last two years to make remote learning and the return to campus successful and safe.

“Members of the Class of 2020, members of the Class of 2021, you need not be challenged further — at least during your time at Harvard,” Bacow said. “May you proceed from this space connected to one another, steeled by your experience, more confident and resilient, and ready to meet whatever the world throws at you in the future. Take what you have learned during your time here and use your education to leave this imperfect world better than you found it. I have great confidence that you will.”

Share this article

More like this

Break down walls. Vanquish villains. Stand up and speak out. Facts and truth matter.

You might like.

Longtime supporter of grads Kathy Hanley caps 13-year quest with a Commencement of her own

Class of ’24 gets a do-over on high school prom that pandemic took away

Three major events, including Psychedelics Bootcamp 2024, to be hosted over summer

Epic science inside a cubic millimeter of brain

Researchers publish largest-ever dataset of neural connections

Finding right mix on campus speech policies

Legal, political scholars discuss balancing personal safety, constitutional rights, academic freedom amid roiling protests, cultural shifts

Good genes are nice, but joy is better

Harvard study, almost 80 years old, has proved that embracing community helps us live longer, and be happier

News from the Columbia Climate School

The Value of Public Service

Steve Cohen

We live in a complex interconnected world with many powerful forces competing for power, profit and influence. We are all part of a global economy that I believe will someday provide a sustainable, renewable resource-based living for everyone. But in a world where we are constantly interacting and competing, we also need to nurture and generate the value of cooperation and compassion. This value or ethos includes helping our neighbors in need, but also helping those we do not know. This is a value I call public service. Such a value is critical in helping those that lose in the competitive race for gain, as well as those that are weak, ill, or simply unlucky. Given the vast resources we have in the developed world I believe it is simply unethical to watch suffering without acting to alleviate it.

The value of service was one I first became aware of watching President John F. Kennedy’s inauguration as U.S. President in January, 1961. President Kennedy challenged us to “ask what we could do for our country”. He spoke of meeting national challenges with a call to service and defined service broadly enough to establish the Peace Corps. His inaugural addressed the issue of global poverty  when he observed :

“To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required—not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right.  If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.”  (emphasis added)

Our most recent presidential inauguration expressed a different set of values when President Trump declared:

“From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land. From this day forward, it’s going to be only America first, America first. Every decision on trade, on taxes, on immigration, on foreign affairs will be made to benefit American workers and American families. We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies and destroying our jobs.”

The contrast between President Kennedy’s call for sacrifice and service and President Trump’s appeal to self-interest could not be clearer. Kennedy’s rhetoric included a challenge to respond to the threats of modern life with global engagement and service for the greater good. Trump’s rhetoric called for hunkering down and focusing on self-interest. Kennedy empathized with the aspirations of the developing world, Trump sees those aspirations as threats to American prosperity. To this seven year old boy in Brooklyn, President Kennedy made the idea of public service noble; it led me directly to government service in the U.S. EPA at the start of my career. I doubt any kid listening to the Trump inaugural will be similarly inspired. One could argue that government in 2017 is very different than government was in 1961. Fair enough. But the ideal of service remains the same.

Public service is of course not simply working for the government, or for the military or Peace Corps, but any activity that takes you beyond your self-interest into the world of helping others. After natural and human made disasters we see many examples of people helping each other. In the aftermath of hurricanes in Texas and Florida this fall there were wonderful scenes of people helping people. Race, ethnicity, and political ideology faded as neighbors lent a helping hand to neighbors. It would be easier and maybe safer to walk away, but the value of service drives us into the fray. That urge to help, that impulse to service is the glue that binds together a complex, often competitive society.

I work in a university where we try to focus on the problems that the world needs to solve. That is one of the functions of a modern research university. But like the media that has made its business model one of accentuating how we differ, we are losing sight of how much we are alike. By demonizing those that don’t think exactly as we do, we lose the opportunity for dialogue and understanding. By focusing on how we are falling short of perfection, we lose sight of how much progress we have made. A way to address this lack of discussion is to encourage the value of free speech, something Columbia University does partly because our president is a First Amendment scholar. A second way to gain the perspective we need is to continue to encourage the value of public service.

In the process of working to help your neighbor, not only does your neighbor in need benefit from your help, but you benefit from the experience of helping. You get to walk a mile in the other person’s shoes, to see life from someone else’s perspective. Society gains from this growing sense of empathy and from a deeper understanding of people in need. There is a danger when this sense of charity begins to excuse the absence of personal responsibility, but I do not see the values of service and personal responsibility as incompatible.

The value of public service becomes a lens through which you view the world and the behaviors within it. Sometimes it is a routine act of helping, like lending a hand when someone is carrying a baby in a stroller up the subway steps. Sometimes it is an act of heroism such as one we saw recently in the case of a soldier who gave his life to save people in an apartment fire. As  reported by Elizabeth A. Harris, Ashley Southall and Vivian Wang  on December 29:

“Emmanuel Mensah was a handsome, strongly built young man in his late 20s who immigrated to the Bronx from Ghana five years ago. He joined the Army National Guard but returned to his apartment on Prospect Avenue in December, after graduating from boot camp with the rank of private first class. And on Thursday night, he lost his life trying to save people from his furiously burning apartment building, one of 12 people to die in the blaze. “He brought four people out,” said his uncle, Twum Bredu, who lives next door. “When he went to bring a fifth person out, the fire caught up with him.””

Saving one family was not enough, as long as more people were in danger, this young man felt compelled to once again face danger. The value of public service does not require that we act heroically and put our lives in danger, but that we respect and admire those that do. In the case of our sitting president, I worry that he might consider Mr. Mensah a loser, since he died trying to save people. Trump famously criticized Senator John McCain for getting captured during the Vietnam War. Anyone valuing public service could never say such a thing. Even those of us who opposed the Vietnam War have reason to cherish and value John McCain’s courage and conduct during his horrific captivity.

The broad sweep of world history and our growing ability to use technology to meet basic human needs of food, water, air, clothing and shelter, has led to a gradual reduction in the amount of poverty in the world. We have within our reach the potential to end poverty. But once we achieve that historic goal there will still be winners and losers in the world. There will always be a need to help those who need help. The issue for humankind is to nurture the value of service. To see people as fundamentally the same and worthy of assistance.

I remain mindful of the presence of evil in the world and of people who seek to harm people. One could not have lived in New York City on September 11, 2001 and not understand the capacity for great evil. One form of service is to fight that evil and combat it in all of its forms wherever it appears. But let’s not confuse the small number of evil people with the overwhelming majority that share the goal of living in peace, providing for their family, and participating in a constructive, positive society. Let’s not let anger at evil distort our understanding of how the world works.

The value of public service calls on all of us to respond to the better parts of our humanity and is self-reinforcing. By doing good we become good. As we approach 2018, let’s look for what is good in this country and what unites us. Let’s not become the victims of hatred, but the beneficiaries of a world made better by our efforts to help each other.

Related Posts

From Fission to Fusion: A Sustainability Student’s Quest for a Greener Future

Meet the Woman Pioneering Sustainable Change in Fashion

Environmental Sustainability and Consumption

Congratulations to our Columbia Climate School MA in Climate & Society Class of 2024! Learn about our May 10 Class Day  celebration. #ColumbiaClimate2024

Get the Columbia Climate School Newsletter

The pandemic reminds us of the importance of public service

Subscribe to the center on the united states and europe update, fiona hill fiona hill senior fellow - foreign policy , center on the united states and europe.

May 13, 2020

The week of May 4 was Public Service Recognition Week (PSRW), when the country honors those who serve as federal, state, county and local government employees and recognize the essential value of government service in American public life. PSRW was established in 1985, 35 years ago, but has not captured the popular imagination owing to persistent levels of distrust in the U.S. government. On May 4, 2020, the Brookings Institution partnered with the bipartisan National Commission on Military, National and Public Service for an event to mark the beginning of PSRW and to address ways of reversing some of the negative popular attitudes. Brookings President John R. Allen and Commission Chairman Joseph J. Heck opened the event, followed by a conversation between Allen, Heck, Commissioner Avril Haines, and Brookings Senior Fellow Isabel Sawhill. I had the pleasure of moderating the discussion.

Two decades ago, the Brookings Institution’s Center for Public Service also initiated a National Commission on the Public Service with former Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volcker and 10 commissioners drawn from both political parties with diverse experiences of public service. The final report from this effort was released in January 2003. In contrast with Brookings’s earlier effort, the National Commission on Military, National and Public Service was set up by Congress, as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, with a two-year mandate to engage the public to produce recommendations for increasing American participation in all forms of service. Brookings scholars from the Economic Studies and Governance Studies programs took part in the exercise. Avril Haines , new Foreign Policy Program affiliate, was one of the commissioners. The commission’s interim report was issued in early 2019, in the immediate aftermath of the longest federal government shutdown in U.S. history (from December 22, 2018 to January 25, 2019).

The commission released its final report, titled Inspired to Serve , in March 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic, at a time when public servants, military service members, volunteers, and national service members were battling to stem the spread of the virus and to safeguard public health. In an interview with The New York Times at the beginning of April 2020, Dr. Anthony Fauci, a highly-visible member of the White House pandemic task force, and head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health, was asked how he would like to be remembered when the pandemic was finally over. He replied that, most of all, he wanted to be recognized as a dedicated public servant, who had done the best that he could to mitigate a terrible disease. In the same interview, Dr. Fauci summed up the general ethos of public service as essentially trying to fix and improve things for the greater good.

Dr. Fauci was first in the national spotlight four decades ago during the early years of the HIV/AIDS public health crisis; by 2020, he has become a household name. As a result of the pandemic, Pew polls released in April 2020 indicated an increase in positive impressions of federal agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Health and Human Services (DHS), with 79% of Americans having a favorable opinion of the former and 73% of the latter. Nonetheless — as panelists discussed during the May 4 event — Dr. Fauci’s prominence, the visibility of other public servants on the frontlines of tackling the COVID-19 pandemic, and these positive polls, may not mark a durable shift in U.S. public understanding of the essential role public servants play in meeting the country’s challenges or in popular views of government service.

Next year, in 2021, the U.S. will commemorate the 60th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy’s call to service . Since then, other U.S. leaders have promoted public and national service in a nonpartisan or bipartisan manner, often building on the work of their predecessors. The year 2019 marked the 25th anniversary of the launch of AmeriCorps by President William J. Clinton, which President George W. Bush expanded with the creation of the USA Freedom Corps in 2002, and the Medical Reserve Corps . President Bush’s initiatives were spurred by the nation’s response to the terrorist attack of 9/11. The panelists for the May 4 event all stressed that COVID-19 will require a similar national response.

The National Commission on Military, National and Public Service’s March 2020 report offers one comprehensive approach to this response. In addition to policy recommendations, and specifically targeted legislation, the commission report proposes significant U.S. government and congressional investment in civic education to increase awareness of opportunities for the public, and to make national service the norm for Americans rather than the exception.

Related Content

Online Only

2:00 pm - 3:15 pm EDT

Foreign Policy

Center on the United States and Europe

Constanze Stelzenmüller, Fred Dews

May 3, 2024

Valerie Wirtschafter

May 2, 2024

Melanie W. Sisson

May 1, 2024

Help inform the discussion

Presidential Speeches

May 18, 1963: 90th anniversary of vanderbilt university, about this speech.

John F. Kennedy

May 18, 1963

 Addressing a crowd in Nashville Tennessee Kennedy delivers a passionate speech on the virtues of public service and the fundamental importance of citizens’ responsibilities, invoking Goethe, Bismarck, Jefferson and Aristotle to augment his words. The tensions of the ongoing struggle for civil rights and the Cold War permeate the speech’s subtext.

• Download Audio

Mr. Chancellor, Mr. Vanderbilt, Senator Kefauver, Senator Gore, Congressman Fulton, Congressman Evins, Congressman Bass, Congressman Everett, Tom Murray, distinguished guests, members of the judiciary, the Army Corps of Engineers of the Tennessee Valley:

I first of all want to express my warm appreciation to the Governor and to the Mayor of this State and city and to the people for a very generous welcome, and particularly to all those young men and women who lined the street and played music for us as we drove into this stadium. We are glad they are here with us, and we feel the musical future of this city and State is assured.

Many things bring us together today. We are saluting the 90th anniversary of Vanderbilt University, which has grown from a small Tennessee university and institution to one of our Nation's greatest, with 7 different colleges, and with more than half of its 4200 students from outside of the State of Tennessee.

And we are saluting the 30th anniversary of the Tennessee Valley Authority, which transformed a parched, depressed, and floodravaged region into a fertile, productive center of industry, science, and agriculture.

We are saluting--by initiating construction of a dam in his name--a great Tennessee statesman, Cordell Hull, the father of reciprocal trade, the grandfather of the United Nations, the Secretary of State who presided over the transformation of this Nation from a life of isolation and almost indifference to a state of responsible world leadership.

And finally, we are saluting--by the recognition of a forthcoming dam in his name-J. Percy Priest, a former colleague of mine in the House of Representatives, who represented this district, this State, and this Nation in the Congress for 16 turbulent years--years which witnessed the crumbling of empires, the splitting of the atom, the conquest of one threat to freedom, and the emergence of still another.

If there is one unchanging theme that runs throughout these separate stories, it is that everything changes but change itself. We live in an age of movement and change, both evolutionary and revolutionary, both good and evil--and in such an age a university has a special obligation to hold fast to the best of the past and move fast to the best of the future.

Nearly 100 years ago Prince Bismarck said that one-third of the students of German universities broke down from overwork, another third broke down from dissipation, and the other third ruled Germany. I do not know which third of the student body of Vanderbilt is here today, but I am confident we are talking to the future rulers of Tennessee and America in the spirit of this university.

The essence of Vanderbilt is still learning, the essence of its outlook is still liberty, and liberty and learning will be and must be the touchstones of Vanderbilt University and of any free university in this country or the world. I say two touchstones, yet they are almost inseparable, inseparable if not indistinguishable, for liberty without learning is always in peril, and learning without liberty is always in vain.

This State, this city, this campus, have stood long for both human rights and human enlightenment--and let that forever be true. This Nation is now engaged in a continuing debate about the rights of a portion of its citizens. That will go on, and those rights will expand until the standard first forged by the Nation's founders has been reached, and all Americans enjoy equal opportunity and liberty under law.

But this Nation was not founded solely on the principle of citizens' rights. Equally important, though too often not discussed, is the citizen's responsibility. For our privileges can be no greater than our obligations. The protection of our rights can endure no longer than the performance of our responsibilities. Each can be neglected only at the peril of the other. I speak to you today, therefore, not of your rights as Americans, but of your responsibilities. They are many in number and different in nature. They do not rest with equal weight upon the shoulders of all. Equality of opportunity does not mean equality of responsibility. All Americans must be responsible citizens, but some must be more responsible than others, by virtue of their public or their private position, their role in the family or community, their prospects for the future, or their legacy from the past.

Increased responsibility goes with increased ability, for "of those to whom much is given, much is required."

Commodore Vanderbilt recognized this responsibility and his recognition made possible the establishment of a great institution of learning for which he will be long remembered after his steamboats and railroads have been forgotten. I speak in particular, therefore, of the responsibility of the educated citizen, including the students, the faculty, and the alumni of this great institution. The creation and maintenance of Vanderbilt University, like that of all great universities, has required considerable effort and expenditure, and I cannot believe that all of this was undertaken merely to give this school's graduates an economic advantage in the life struggle. "Every man sent out from a university," said Professor Woodrow Wilson, "Every man sent out from a university should be a man of his Nation, as well as a man of his time."

You have responsibilities, in short, to use your talents for the benefit of the society which helped develop those talents. You must decide, as Goethe put it, whether you will be an anvil or a hammer, whether you will give to the world in which you were reared and educated the broadest possible benefits of that education. Of the many special obligations incumbent upon an educated citizen, I would cite three as outstanding: your obligation to the pursuit of learning, your obligation to serve the public, your obligation to uphold the law.

If the pursuit of learning is not defended by the educated citizen, it will not be defended at all. For there will always be those who scoff at intellectuals, who cry out against research, who seek to limit our educational system. Modern cynics and skeptics see no more reason for landing a man on the moon, which we shall do, than the cynics and skeptics of half a millennium ago saw for the discovery of this country. They see no harm in paying those to whom they entrust the minds of their children a smaller wage than is paid to those to whom they entrust the care of their plumbing.

But the educated citizen knows how much more there is to know. He knows that "knowledge is power," more so today than ever before. He knows that only an educated and informed people will be a free people, that the ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all, and that if we can, as Jefferson put it, "enlighten the people generally ... tyranny and the oppressions of mind and body will vanish, like evil spirits at the dawn of day." And, therefore, the educated citizen has a special obligation to encourage the pursuit of learning, to promote exploration of the unknown, to preserve the freedom of inquiry, to support the advancement of research, and to assist at every level of government the improvement of education for all Americans, from grade school to graduate school.

Secondly, the educated citizen has an obligation to serve the public. He may be a precinct worker or President. He may give his talents at the courthouse, the State house, the White House. He may be a civil servant or a Senator, a candidate or a campaign worker, a winner or a loser. But he must be a participant and not a spectator.

"At the Olympic games," Aristotle wrote, "it is not the finest and strongest men who are crowned, but they who enter the lists-for out of these the prize-men are elected. So, too, in life, of the honorable and the good, it is they who act who rightly win the prizes."

I urge all of you today, especially those who are students, to act, to enter the lists of public service and rightly win or lose the prize. For we can have only one form of aristocracy in this country, as Jefferson wrote long ago in rejecting John Adams' suggestion of an artificial aristocracy of wealth and birth. It is, he wrote, the natural aristocracy of character and talent, and the best form of government, he added, was that which selected these men for positions of responsibility.

I would hope that all educated citizens would fulfill this obligation--in politics, in Government, here in Nashville, here in this State, in the Peace Corps, in the Foreign Service, in the Government Service, in the Tennessee Valley, in the world. You will find the pressures greater than the pay. You may endure more public attacks than support. But you will have the unequaled satisfaction of knowing that your character and talent are contributing to the direction and success of this free society.

Third, and finally, the educated citizen has an obligation to uphold the law. This is the obligation of every citizen in a free and peaceful society--but the educated citizen has a special responsibility by the virtue of his greater understanding. For whether he has ever studied history or current events, ethics or civics, the rules of a profession or the tools of a trade, he knows that only a respect for the law makes it possible for free men to dwell together in peace and progress.

He knows that law is the adhesive force in the cement of society, creating order out of chaos and coherence in place of anarchy. He knows that for one man to defy a law or court order he does not like is to invite others to defy those which they do not like, leading to a breakdown of all justice and all order. He knows, too, that every fellowman is entitled to be regarded with decency and treated with dignity. Any educated citizen who seeks to subvert the law, to suppress freedom, or to subject other human beings to acts that are less than human, degrades his heritage, ignores his learning, and betrays his obligation.

Certain other societies may respect the rule of force--we respect the rule of law.

The Nation, indeed the whole world, has watched recent events in the United States with alarm and dismay. No one can deny the complexity of the problems involved in assuring to all of our citizens their full fights as Americans. But no one can gainsay the fact that the determination to secure these rights is in the highest traditions of American freedom.

In these moments of tragic disorder, a special burden rests on the educated men and women of our country to reject the temptations of prejudice and violence, and to reaffirm the values of freedom and law on which our free society depends.

When Bishop McTyeire, 90 years ago, proposed it to Commodore Vanderbilt, he said, "Commodore, our country has been torn to pieces by a civil war .... We want to repair this damage." And Commodore Vanderbilt reportedly replied, "I want to unite this country, and all sections of it, so that all our people will be one." His response, his recognition of his obligation and opportunity gave Vanderbilt University not only an endowment but also a mission. Now, 90 years later, in a time of tension, it is more important than ever to unite this country and strengthen these ties so that all of our people will be one.

Ninety years from now I have no doubt that Vanderbilt University will still be fulfilling this mission. It will still uphold learning, encourage public service, and teach respect for the law. It will neither turn its back on proven wisdom or turn its face from newborn challenge. It will still pass on to the youth of our land the full meaning of their rights and their responsibilities. And it will still be teaching the truth--the truth that makes us free and will keep us free. Thank you.

More John F. Kennedy speeches

U.S. Government Accountability Office

The Privilege of Public Service

This speech was given by the Comptroller General before the Roger W. Jones Award for Executive Leadership Ceremony at the American University School of Public Affairs in Washington, D.C. on October 24, 2006. The namesake of this award, Roger Jones, had a distinguished career in government, one that spanned many decades and a number of major departments and agencies. In particular, Roger Jones was known as a champion of education for federal managers and executives, and he received a number of high honors for his efforts to improve the quality of public administration. During my tenure as the head of three federal agencies, I've found that outstanding public servants share certain traits: great vision, solid values, and a deep commitment to the mission of their agency. To keep pace with the challenges that are coming, our government must also change. Government transformation is essential. In my view, the first order of business is to restore fiscal discipline. Washington needs to face facts and improve transparency over where we are financially and where we're headed fiscally. The simple but powerful truth is that effective government requires a first-rate workforce. To tackle current and emerging problems, government needs men and women who are able to think strategically, creatively, and decisively. Public service is a privilege. It's a chance to make peoples' lives better and their futures brighter. Public service is a calling where individuals and organizations can help build a better future for our nation and our world.

Full Report

Office of public affairs.

Chuck Young Managing Director [email protected] (202) 512-4800

Search the United Nations

• UN Observances

As we mark this important day, let us celebrate not only the work of public servants worldwide, but their commitment to working in partnership to build a better future for all people. UN Secretary-General António Guterres

United Nations Public Service Day and Awards

The UN Public Service Day intends to celebrate the value and virtue of public service to the community; highlight the contribution of public service in the development process; recognize the work of public servants, and encourage young people to pursue careers in the public sector. Since the first Awards Ceremony in 2003, the United Nations has received an increasing number of submissions from all around the world.

2023 United Nations Public Service Awards takes a break

The United Nations Public Service Awards is the most prestigious international recognition of excellence in public service. It rewards the creative achievements and contributions of public service institutions that lead to a more effective and responsive public administration in countries worldwide. Through an annual competition, the UN Public Service Awards promotes the role, professionalism and visibility of public service.

On 20 December 2002, the General Assembly designated 23 June as Public Service Day by adopting resolution 57/277 .

To bolster recognition of the Day and the value of public service, the United Nations established the UN Public Service Awards ( UNPSA ) programme in 2003, which was reviewed in 2016 to align with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The United Nations Public Service Forum is a global event that focuses on capacity development in public governance. Each year UN DESA organizes the Forum with a host country, using the event to host capacity-development workshops, the UN Public Service Awards ceremony and a Ministerial Roundtable.

Public institutions for the Sustainable Development Goals

Effective, accountable and inclusive institutions are essential to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals ( SDGs ). This is recognized by SDG 16 and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development . The Agenda also recognized that governments have the primary responsibility for implementing the SDGs and ensuring follow-up and review over the coming 15 years, at the national, regional and global levels. One of the first steps governments take to implement the Agenda is often to shape the institutional arrangements for steering the implementation of the SDGs and reviewing progress.

Public administration - the cornerstone of governments' work-plays an essential and critical role in improving people’s lives. Reinventing public administration is a positive and necessary way forward. Without public administration modernization and transformation to adapt to today’s needs, realizing a better future for all will be impossible. Where capable administrations are lacking, governments are incapacitated; and where governments are incapacitated, sustainable development falls short.

Virtual Event on 22 June, 2022

Join us for a Virtual Celebration of United Nations Public Service Day on 22 June 2022 under the theme of "Building back better from COVID-19: Enhancing innovative partnerships to meet the Sustainable Development Goals." The 2022 United Nations Public Service Award winners will be announced during the online event. Watch live on UN Web TV

Key Documents

• General Assembly resolution proclaiming the Day
• Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
• United Nations Millennium Declaration
• The Tangier Declaration

Related links

• Committee of Experts on Public Administration
• Division For Public Institutions And Digital Government (UN DESA)
• United Nations Public Service Awards
• United Nations Public Service Forum

World Public Sector Report

• United Nations Development Programme - Governance
• United Nations Environment Programme - Environmental Governance
• UNITAR - Leadership in the Public Sector
• United Nations Democracy Fund
• International Monetary Fund - IMF and Good Governance
• World Bank - Governance

Related Observances

• International Day of Women Judges
• International Day of Parliamentarism
• International Day for Women in Diplomacy
• International Universal Health Coverage Day
• International Civil Aviation Day

UN Public Service Forum

The United Nations Public Service Forum brings together approximately 800 to 1,000 participants annually. It serves as a platform for discussing emerging challenges, innovative practices, and capacity development strategies related to sustainable development. Each year, the forum explores a specific critical area of public governance and brings together leaders, policymakers, practitioners, and representatives from various sectors.

The World Public Sector Report , one of UNDESA’s Flagship Reports, aims to capture the emerging issues, concerns and innovations in governance and public administration, especially those that contribute to the realization of the UN Development Agenda including the Sustainable Development Goals. The report is intended for policy makers, practitioners and civil society, particularly in developing countries and transition economies.

Why do we mark International Days?

International days and weeks are occasions to educate the public on issues of concern, to mobilize political will and resources to address global problems, and to celebrate and reinforce achievements of humanity. The existence of international days predates the establishment of the United Nations, but the UN has embraced them as a powerful advocacy tool. We also mark other UN observances .

• 847-299-9500
• Affilate Login

MediaTracks Communications

Producer of syndicated radio public affairs programming, and a leader in radio and audio services for the public relations industry based in Chicago, IL.

COVID-19: MediaTracks Is Ready To Help.

Our half hour public affairs shows are available on a short-term basis.

30 Second PSA Examples

Putting a public service announcement (PSA) together doesn’t have to be a difficult or complex process. Focus on creating a message that has some community impact and value, then write your script keeping it concise and to the point. Think broadcast-style vs. print and you’re much of the way there.

Before you sit down to write your own PSA, take a moment to review this guide, look at the PSA examples included here, and use our handy PSA checklist as an aid.

What should be included in a PSA?

PSAs are often used to highlight a community issue and persuade individuals to take action. They can convey information, create awareness, offer assistance or encourage a change in behavior. Governmental agencies, civic groups, voluntary organizations, and non-profits use radio PSAs to reach a wide and diverse audience, making them an effective marketing tool for your organization.

One major advantage of radio PSAs is their relatively low cost to write, produce and distribute in return for the significant media value they deliver. Their ability to reach a targeted audience, and the free airtime radio stations provide for their broadcasts, make PSAs a perfect, low-cost choice for non-profit outreach. Plus, residents of the communities in which they air benefit from knowing about the many services that local non-profit organizations provide.

Can any organization put a PSA on the air?

Unfortunately, not all organizations are able to run PSAs. For-profit organizations do not meet the standards under federal law to qualify for PSAs. Even if the organization or company has a public service message, a PSA is not the answer for them. The only types of organizations that are eligible for PSAs are governmental agencies, civic groups, voluntary organizations, and non-profits.

For-profit organizations may opt for an Audio News Release (ANR) if they have information of a public service nature that they want to share. With enough news value or community benefit, local radio stations will consider providing coverage. Another option is to consider using paid media or guaranteed placement to insure your message will be heard.

What makes a good 30 second PSA?

A good 30 second PSA contains all the key messages and information laid out in a pleasing, yet succinct manner. The challenge is doing it in under 90 words. You’ll need a strong hook at the opening and a compelling call to action at the end.

For example, this is a 30 second PSA script on vaccinations from the Illinois State Medical Society:

In healthcare, misinformation can be as deadly as the most serious disease – and spread just as quickly. For years now, myths about childhood immunizations have been spreading on the Internet and social media. The physicians of the Illinois State Medical Society urge parents to know the facts and get your children immunized. Immunizations are scientifically proven to be safe and effective, and failure to immunize can harm your children and others. Talk to your child’s doctor to get the facts about immunizations.

Look at the first sentence – a very strong hook. It gets people’s attention. Next, there’s the key messages of the PSA that provides the information the organization wanted to convey about vaccinations. Finally, it ends with a compelling call to action, for parents to talk to their children’s doctor about immunizations.

This next 30 second PSA example from the Leukemia Research Foundation announces an upcoming conference, encouraging people to attend:

If you or a loved one is living with leukemia, lymphoma, multiple myeloma, or MDS, don’t miss the 15th annual Treatment Options for Blood Cancer Patients conference on Saturday morning, May 11, at the Hyatt Regency in Lisle. You’ll learn about the latest breakthroughs and emerging treatments presented by leading experts in the field. The free Treatment Options Conference is presented by the Leukemia Research Foundation and includes breakfast and lunch. For more information, registration, and a full program agenda visit all-blood-cancers-dot-org.

In addition to including details of what will happen at the conference, this PSA also includes the day, date, time, and location of the event as well as a website that offers even more information.

How to write a 30 second PSA

The first step in writing a PSA is drilling down to your key messages . Chances are you already know the topic, be it an upcoming event or a planned awareness campaign. If the PSA is meant to create awareness for your organization and the community benefit it provides, then you may need to focus on a single topic.

Know your audience before you begin writing. You want to tailor your PSA to your targeted demographic. For instance, your approach to reaching young married couples will likely be different than retirees.

Always start with a strong hook , something to get your audience’s attention and keep them listening.

Avoid broad strokes. You want your focus to be narrow so the message stays clear and sharp.

Adding statistics and citing expert resources makes your PSA stronger. Make sure that any information you include is the most current available. Accuracy is vital. Outdated or wrong information can damage your organization’s credibility.

Create the script, keeping in mind the maximum word count of 90 . It may help to first bullet point and order the information that you’d like to include. Put the most important information at the top of the list, and work from there. Around 5 to 7 key aspects tend to work best but keep them concise.

Once your script is complete, record it and distribute it to the key stations in your targeted area.

Crucial information to include in your PSA (a checklist)

Use this helpful checklist when you sit down to write your 30 second PSA.

• Write your script to a total of no more than 90 words (could be as few as 75 words). A professional voice talent can speak about 180 words a minute at a moderate pace. This means that in 30 seconds they can speak about 90 words.
• Develop a strong hook that grabs the listener’s attention and holds it while the key messages are conveyed.
• Prepare 5 to 7 main points that support a single message.
• Include facts or statistics with resources to back it up.
• If it’s an event, provide the day, date, time, location, and cost
• Close with a compelling call to action telling listeners to “call this number,” “talk to your doctor,” “visit this website,” or “attend the event.”

If you are considering a PSA for your organization, MediaTracks Communications can help. Our experts will help you write, produce and distribute a PSA that will grab your audience’s attention and get results. From bringing your message into sharp focus to targeting specific demographics to getting widespread placement, we are here to assist. Give us a call today or visit our website for more information and to see more PSA samples.

Looking for better results with your client’s radio campaigns?

• Recent Posts

Become a Broadcast Media Insider

Join to receive our FREE industry insights, trends, tips and more. Email updates sent monthly. No-hassle unsubscribe.

• Type Your Name *
• Type Your Email *
• Media Services
• All Radio Services
• Audio News Release (ANR)
• Radio Media Tours (RMTs)
• Public Service Announcements (PSAs)
• Custom Feed Audio News Releases
• Spanish Language Audio News Release
• Urban Reach
• Start a Project

2250 E. Devon Avenue, Suite 150 Des Plaines, IL 60018

847-299-9500 [email protected]

Jerome Powell recalls the moment that changed his life forever: ‘A little initiative can make all the difference in anyone’s career’

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell made a pitch for public service to recently minted graduates at Georgetown University Law Center, his alma mater, on Sunday.

The former investment banker left the practice of law a few years after receiving his degree, but he emphasized that his education opened up many potential paths, including the opportunity to work in government. 

“Each of you has the capability to achieve success in any field you choose; it is important that you also consider how to give back and use your gifts to make a difference,” he said in prepared remarks, encouraging the graduates to “think beyond yourselves.”

The Fed chief delivered the address by prerecorded video at the school’s commencement ceremony in Washington, after testing positive for Covid-19 late Thursday. A spokesperson said Powell was experiencing symptoms and isolating at home.

Taking Initiative

Powell recounted how, as a junior employee at investment bank Dillon Read & Co., he mustered the courage to tell his then-boss Nicholas Brady that he was eager to serve in government if the opportunity ever arose. 

Brady later sought Powell’s help defending an oil company from a hostile takeover attempt, he said, and the two spent months traveling back and forth to Washington. When Brady became Treasury secretary several years later, he asked Powell to join him there, “which opened the door for me to  higher levels  of public service.”

“The point is this: if I had not forced myself to get up from my desk, taken the stairs up to the 15th floor, and presented myself to his office that day, the rest of my life would have been very different, and I would not be standing here today,” he said. 

“Mustering that little bit of initiative changed my life,” he said. “A little initiative can make all the difference in anyone’s career.”

Latest in Success

This millennial-founded Chinese company scored a $6 billion valuation selling mystery toys. Now it wants to cash in on America’s cuteness craze

A group of college kids may have just figured out how to get leaf blowers to shut up

I’m nearing 65 and am better than ever at my job. With more boomers opting not to retire, I’m not alone

TodayTix CEO Brian Fenty took over at 31. Now 38, he warns aspirational young leaders: ‘There’s a fine line between fake it till you make it and learn it and do it well’

‘Single greatest talent acquisition opportunity’: Elon Musk firing Tesla’s Supercharger team proves an unprecedented gift for the EV industry

Most popular.

France admits it’s lost control of parts of New Caledonia, the world’s third-largest producer of critical EV metal nickel

Amazon raised warehouse wages to $15 an hour 5 years ago. Today, half of workers surveyed told researchers they struggle to afford  food or rent

Why can’t America have high speed rail? Because our investment is a ‘rounding error’ compared with Europe’s, says Amtrak’s CEO

Thousands of North Koreans stole Americans’ identities and took remote-work tech jobs at Fortune 500 companies, DOJ says

Consumers are so demoralized by inflation and high rates that they’ve given up on saving for the American Dream and are spending money instead, economist says

Texas power prices briefly soar 1,600% as a spring heat wave is expected to drive record demand for energy

Scott Morrison tells public servants: keep in mind the ‘bacon and eggs’ principle

Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Disclosure statement

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

University of Canberra provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

Scott Morrison has a sharp lecture for bureaucrats about their KPIs, in a comprehensive speech laying down how he expects the Australian Public Service to operate under his government.

Morrison stresses the service must be responsive to both its ministers and the “quiet Australians”, look beyond the noisy “bubble”, and be more open to outsiders, in a Monday address to the Institute of Public Administration, issued beforehand.

He calls for a “step-change” in improving delivery, greater diversity of views within the service, and the “busting” of regulatory congestion.

The Prime Minister is producing his blueprint ahead of formally receiving the report from the comprehensive review led by businessman David Thodey, which is coming within weeks – although Morrison has had discussions on its content and reportedly told the panel to take a tougher line on performance standards.

His speech themes build on views he has previously articulated, directly to departmental secretaries and in media comments. His focus is heavily on better service delivery, and his message to the bureaucrats is to remember they are on tap not on top. His concept is narrower than the ideas in a report, commissioned by the Australia and New Zealand School of Government (ANZSOG) and released last week, which highlighted the need for more creative thinking and a greater scope for public servants to speak truth to power in their advisory role.

Read more: Politics with Michelle Grattan: on the 'creeping crisis' in the public service

In his speech Morrison also has very direct words for his ministers, about running their departments. Responsibility for setting policy lies with those elected, he says - ministers must be clear about what they are asking of their public servants.

They must not allow a policy leadership vacuum to be created, expecting the public service to fill it and do their job. One of the worst criticisms politicians can make of each other is that a minister is a captive of their department.

He says he has “selected and tasked my ministers to set and drive the agenda of our government”.

Morrison points out that accountability to parliament and the public for the government’s policies rests with those who are elected.

“Only those who have put their name on a ballot can truly understand the significance of that accountability. I know you [public servants] might feel sometimes that you are absolutely right in what you are suggesting, but I can tell you when it is you that is facing the public and must look your constituents in the eye, it gives you a unique perspective.”

He says his rugby coach used to describe this as “the bacon and eggs principle – the chicken is involved, but the pig is committed.

"That is why under our system of government it must be ministers who set the policy direction.”

Read more: Grattan on Friday: Morrison can learn a lot from the public servants, but will he listen?

Morrison sets out six “guideposts” for the evolution of the public service and his priorities:

the “respect and expect” principle, defining the relationship between government and the bureaucracy

the centrality of implementation

“look at the scoreboard” - a strong emphasis on “priorities, targets and metrics across all portfolios”. (He says he has established a Priorities and Delivery Unit in the Prime Minister’s Department, and cabinet ministers are developing objectives and targets.)

having eyes on “middle Australia” - looking “beyond the bubble” of the “many highly organised and well resourced interests” that go often to Canberra and are in the media

following the “Ray Price principle”, a reference to a former leading Rugby League player dubbed “Mr Perpetual Motion” - adapting amid constant change

honouring the public service code of governance and integrity across the bureaucracy.

On implementation, Morrison says: “Ensuring services are delivered seamlessly and efficiently, when and where they are needed, is a key priority of my government.

Good government is about receiving excellent policy advice. But that advice is only as good as the consideration in detail that it gives to implementation and execution. And this is not an exercise in providing a detached and dispassionate summary of risks that are logged in the ‘told you so’ file for reference in future memoirs. It’s about telling governments how things can be done, not just the risks of doing them, or saying why they shouldn’t. The public service is meant to be an enabler of government policy not an obstacle.

Read more: To restore trust in government, we need to reinvent how the public service works

Morrison says the thinking behind his establishment of Services Australia – in the post-election reshuffle - "isn’t some fancy re-branding exercise.

It’s a message to the whole of the APS – top-to-bottom – about what matters to people. It’s about ‘doing the little things well’ – everything from reducing call waiting times and turnaround on correspondence right through to improving the experience people have walking into a Centrelink office.

Highlighting the "quiet Australians”, Morrison says “the vast majority” of people “will never come to Canberra to lobby government. They won’t stay at the Hyatt. Or lunch at the Ottoman. Or kick back in the Chairman’s Lounge at Canberra airport after a day of meetings.”

But these members of the public are the public service’s stakeholders - not the “vested and organised interests that pretend to this status,” he says.

I want the APS to have a laser-like focus on serving these quiet Australians. Those you don’t meet with and never hear from. Australians who just get on with it, but who often feel their voice gets drowned out by shoutier ones in our public square. There is strong evidence that the ‘trust deficit’ that has afflicted many Western democracies over recent years stems in part from a perception that politics is very responsive to those at the top and those at the bottom, but not so much to those in the middle. This will not be the case under my government. Middle Australia needs to know that the government (including the public service) is on their side.

Declaring the public service should value diversity, Morrison says “a commitment to diversity should encompass diversity of viewpoints within the APS. There is compelling evidence that this helps teams find answers to complex problems by bringing together people who approach questions from different points of view.

It’s vital that the APS avoid the sort of stale conventional wisdoms and orthodoxies that can infuse all large organisations.

Urging more two-way flow between the public service and outside employment, Morrison says: "We need to find new ways for smart, dedicated Australians to make a contribution to public service, to see a stint in the public service as part of their career journey. And likewise for career public servants to see time outside of the APS in the non-government sector and in business as an important part of their career journey.”

• Public service
• Scott Morrison
• Australian Public Service
• Thodey review

Executive Dean, Faculty of Health

Compliance Lead

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer - Marketing

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship

Lecturer/Senior Lecturer, Earth System Science (School of Science)

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

“The privilege of public service” given as the Ditchley Annual Lecture

Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Michael Gove, gave the Ditchley Annual Lecture on “The privilege of public service”.

Writing in his Prison Notebooks, ninety years ago, the Italian Marxist thinker Antonio Gramsci defined our times. “The crisis consists precisely of the fact that the inherited is dying – and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear”.

Gramsci’s analysis was developed between 1929 and 1935. The stability of the Edwardian Age – of secure crowns, borderless travel, imperial administrative elites and growing economic globalisation – was a memory. The inherited world of aristocratic liberalism had gone.

But a new world of liberal, democratic nation states with welfare systems, social insurance and cross-class solidarity was still a distant prospect. And for those who were charged with leadership there were any number of morbid symptoms affecting their bodies politic at that time.

Economic depression had undermined faith in Western democracy. Traditional political and party structures broke down while protectionist trade barriers went up. Ideological polarisation divided families and societies, competition for resources generated international conflicts, and new technologies offered expanded realms of opportunity but they also unsettled traditional patterns of working, and they threatened new and horrific means of destruction.

Now our age is not the 1930s. But it is an age of morbid symptoms. The model that the current generation of political leaders inherited has been crumbling.

For much of the period since 1945, Western nations have had relatively stable party and political structures. The leaders of those nations, political and business, have justified their positions on the grounds of meritocracy – we’ve proved through our exertions that we’re the best – and also on grounds of efficiency – we’ve shown through the spread of economic growth and greater opportunity that we deliver.

But since the financial crisis of 2008 those foundations and assumptions have been systematically eroded.

Across Western Europe we’ve seen the political system that we inherited fracture. Traditional Social Democratic parties have either been eclipsed or undermined to their left. Syriza in Greece overtook Pasok, Podemos in Spain took huge chunks out of the PSOE, the Dutch Labour Party lost three quarters of its vote in the last general election dropping from the 2nd to the 7th largest grouping in parliament. The French Socialists were left for dust by the radical leftists of La France Insoumise and the German Social Democrats struggle now to appeal to more than a sixth of their electorate, with a number of their former followers supporting the hard left Die Linke leading them to be consistently outpolled by the Greens.

Traditional Christian Democrat or Conservative Parties have tended to fare better. But parties of the radical or populist right have, in many cases, again either undermined their previous dominance or overtaken them entirely. Vox in Spain has chipped away at the PP. The AfD is the first party to the right of the CDU and CSU to sit in the Bundestag since the Federal Republic was established. In the Netherlands the parties of Geert Wilders and Thierry Baudet, difficult to pigeonhole, but both certainly to the right of the traditional Dutch consensus, together have the support of almost twice as many voters as the Dutch Christian Democrats. In France, Marine Le Pen, and in Italy, Matteo Salvini, are the principal opposition figures – again, neither traditional Gaullists or Christian Democrats.

And even in countries where the traditional party structures appear to be continuous with the world we inherited, the parties now take positions which would have been unfamiliar, to put it mildly, to their leaders much less than a generation ago. In America, the ruling Republican orthodoxy is to be sceptical of free trade; unattracted by notions of conventional global leadership; unconvinced by the efficacy of alliances such as NATO. All those positions are departures, I’m sure most would agree, from the position of George W. Bush never mind George H.W. Bush.

It would take more time than I have available today, indeed perhaps more time than any of us still have to spend in our working lives, to establish definitively why this has been so.

But, at its root, is – I think – a deep sense of disenchantment on the part of many of our citizens with a political system that they feel has failed them. The compact leaders offered – trust that we are the best, trust that we have your best interests at heart, and trust that we will deliver – was broken in their eyes.

Even before the financial crisis of 2008, economic growth was slowing across the West, as identified by economists from Robert J. Gordon to Fredrik Erixon and Björn Weigel. And just as growth was slowing, so its diminishing benefits were becoming increasingly concentrated in the hands of the already fortunate – as Andy Haldane put it in 2016, the economic pie has not risen rapidly, and the pie has been unevenly sliced. Those with higher level cognitive skills saw an increasing return for their labour, while those working in traditional manufacturing saw more of their jobs undertaken abroad and indeed saw wages undercut at home.

Globalisation, as practised, seemed to be eroding social solidarity and deepening a gulf between elites and those whom they governed or employed. And that gulf was not simply one of wealth. It was also one of sympathy.

As the British author David Goodhart analysed in his book, The Road to Somewhere, the gap between those with connections and credentials who can live and work anywhere, and those with fewer resources who remain rooted to the heartland, has only widened in recent years. His work, preceded by Christopher Lasch, has been supplemented by the writings of Paul Collier and J.D. Vance among others, and they all underline that those in the elite with cognitive skills, qualifications and professional mobility tend to have, or develop, different social and political values from other citizens.

The views, tastes and concerns of those who write for the New York Times, who run higher education institutions, chair business representative organisations, who advise on ESG responsibilities for corporates and indeed those who run Government departments tend to have become more distant over time from those who build homes, manufacture automobiles, work in logistics, harvest food and dispose of waste. To colour it crudely: the former are more sensitive to the harm caused by alleged micro-aggressions; the latter are less likely to be squeamish about tougher sentences for those guilty of actual physical aggression.

This sense that those who had been in power had presided over a growing gulf in both wealth and attitudes, and were no longer working in solidarity with other citizens, was the backdrop for the crises in authority which started during the first decade of this century.

Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, both of which I supported I should add, were widely seen to have been mismanaged – one suffering from endless revision and ending in retreat; the other perceived to be launched in haste and error; and both revealed faults in policy-making and execution.

Crises of authority in the church consequent upon abuse revelations, in Parliament following the expenses scandal and in the UK media after phone-tapping allegations all unsettled faith in existing leadership.

The migrant crisis on Europe’s southern shores raised profound issues about just how humane and civilised our elites were.

And all these discontents were rising as the world faced the terrible fallout from the financial crisis. Those in politics and business who had been trusted to generate increasing prosperity and provide for social security were found more than wanting. For many, they had failed to anticipate the crisis, failed to identify or take responsibility for what had gone wrong, failed to ensure the burden of repair was fairly shared, failed to reform the institutions, especially the finance and business institutions at the heart of the crisis, and overall failed to recognise the scale of change society demanded.

All these factors underlay the revolt against the elites which saw voters desert established parties, withdraw their support for the economic consensus which had underpinned globalisation for at least three decades and, in many cases, opt for polarised identity politics rather than stay with broad-based national political movements.

These morbid symptoms weakened our politics before the terrible global impact of the coronavirus and they have shaped how many have seen the response to that crisis. During the epidemic we have been made more powerfully aware of entrenched inequalities across the globe, seen how fragile the networks of our interconnected world have become and been reminded that confidence in projections about the future trajectory of a complex phenomenon is often undone.

And the Covid epidemic has also, tragically, underlined the racial and ethnic inequalities in many societies, not least our own in the United Kingdom. The disproportionate impact of the virus on BAME communities is both heartbreaking and a reproach. The reasons for this particular tragedy are various and they require further, rigorous, investigation. But there can be no doubt that they reflect structural inequality in our society which has to be addressed.

As we seek to restore our fractured economies and heal our divided societies following the advent of this pandemic, we must also be aware of other, complex and unpredictable, challenges still to be overcome. Science and technology, invaluable tools in tackling this pandemic, will bring other, dramatic, benefits to our world in the near future. Big data, machine learning, artificial intelligence, robotics and further automation, 3D printing, quantum computing and other advances will transform the manufacturing and service economy. Genetic sequencing and screening, gene editing and other life science and biotech advances could enable transformations in healthcare and environmental stewardship.

All these developments have the potential to improve lives and livelihoods across the globe. But they also require us to think carefully about the moral questions they can raise.

We have seen all too recently how progress, enabled by technology, has brought gains but also exposed flaws in how we organise our societies. The development of our global financial systems enabled capital to be more efficiently allocated, risk to be more effectively hedged and innovation to be more powerfully incentivised – but these financial systems also created the conditions for hugely profound economic dislocation.

So, as we contemplate new technological and scientific breakthroughs we must also consider the ethical and political challenges they bring. Unless they are thoughtfully addressed, we risk further worsening the morbid symptoms of our times.

The changes to the workplace the Fourth Industrial Revolution is likely to bring will see many current jobs and occupations either disappear or alter dramatically. The division between the fortunate and the forgotten could deepen perilously.

Life science and biotech breakthroughs raise old questions about equitable access to healthcare in new, potentially very uncomfortable, ways and they open new territory for ethical concerns about our relationship with the natural world of which we are indivisibly part.

And in speaking of the natural world, the growing loss of biodiversity and the threat of climate change also reinforce how existing inequalities and vulnerabilities risk becoming more pronounced and how we need to understand that complex, adaptive systems demand respectful attention, not glib assertions of mastery.

And what makes these concerns pressing is the knowledge that all these changes – to technology, industry, employment, healthcare, food production, biodiversity and the climate – are coming at us fast.

If we are to be equal to all these challenges, then – as the Prime Minister knows and feels passionately – we need to both acknowledge the scale of the change and be ready to change ourselves. Those in political leadership most of all.

And just as the challenges of the Thirties inspired change, both good and bad, in the nature of political leadership – in the shape and scope of Government, in our sense of duty to the poorer, the vulnerable and the excluded, in our use of technology, in our sense of national and social solidarity – so we must ensure we follow a similar, constructive, progressive, inclusive path to that the best men and women chose then.

And for me, no one walked that path better, in what W.H Auden called the low, dishonest, decade that was the Thirties, than Franklin Delano Roosevelt. When he assumed office in 1933, faith in free markets and the capitalist economy was ebbing dramatically. Indeed confidence in democracy itself was fragile – with, even in America, the idea of dictatorial executive authority winning surprising support.

FDR managed to save capitalism, restore faith in democracy, indeed extend its dominion, renovate the reputation of Government, he set his country on a course of increasing prosperity and equality of opportunity for decades – and enabled America to emerge from a decade of peril with the system, and society, that the free citizens of the rest of the world most envied.

He succeeded on such a scale, of course, because he was a remarkable leader.

But there were principles underlining his approach which I think we should learn from now, as we seek to overcome our own crises of authority; as we seek to reform capitalism, re-invigorate support for democracy, and get Government working better for all while building more inclusive societies.

First, Roosevelt took it as a given that no society could succeed unless every citizen within it had the chance to succeed. Throughout his political career he had been concerned by the plight of the poor and the vulnerable, and he knew they needed Government on their side if they were to achieve the dignity, status and independence they aspired to. Reform was needed, he argued, ‘that builds from the bottom up and not from the top down, that puts faith once more in the forgotten man at the bottom of the economic pyramid’.

There are too many in our time and our society whose economic interests, and whose values, have been forgotten. In our unequal times we must attend increasingly to those who have suffered from neglect and condescension and also to those whose lives have been scarred by racism and prejudice. Our contemporary work of reform must put them first.

Second, Roosevelt recognised that faced with a crisis that had shaken faith in Government, it was not simply a change of personnel and rhetoric that was required but a change in structure, ambition and organisation. The establishment of new bodies such as the Federal Emergency Relief Administration, the Public Works Association, the Civilian Conservation Corps and the Agricultural Adjustment Administration demonstrated a willingness to break the mould of the past. Of course, not every initiative upon which Roosevelt embarked was successful – but he recognised even before he became President that no one can predict at the start of a policy what its end will be. What is needed is both ambition in scope and honesty in assessment.

Faced with tumultuous and difficult times, Roosevelt knew government had to be flexible, adaptive and empirical. That meant taking risks, but it also meant the humility to know when to change course – as he argued in 1932, ‘The country needs, and unless I mistake its temper, the country demands bold persistent experimentation. It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another’.

And third, Roosevelt empowered reformers. Harold Ickes, Henry Wallace, Harry Hopkins, Frances Perkins, Louis Brandeis, Hugh Johnson and others were drawn from different traditions, backgrounds and disciplines – and they were set missions. Their role was not to administer the existing machine, or proclaim abstract virtues, but to act – to achieve real and concrete change in the lives of others.

And as we contemplate the scale of the challenges ahead, for this country, and the wider democratic world, the lessons of FDR’s success have much to teach us.

This Government in the UK was elected on the basis that it would be different from its predecessors, as the Prime Minister set out so brilliantly during the election campaign – and events have only made that mission of change more urgent. We have set out plans for reform in technical education, schools, on the environment, in international development, on housing and planning, in science, digital infrastructure, taxation, public procurement, transport and across the field of Government.

But if this Government is to reform so much, it must also reform itself.

As FDR recognised, the structures, ambitions and priorities of the Government machine need to change if real reform is to be implemented and to endure.

It is part of my job in the Cabinet Office to help drive change. To help demonstrate the good that Government can do, to reaffirm the nobility of service to the public, and to strive every day to use the money, and the powers, that people have vested in us to improve their lives.

Public service is a privilege. Not because it brings wealth or ease. Many of those who work alongside me in the civil service could command higher salaries, and indeed face less stress, in other fields.

No, the privilege comes from knowing that those of us in Government have the chance every day to make a difference. The greatest gift that any of us can be given is the opportunity to lead lives of purpose in public service – to know that by our efforts others stand taller. But with that privilege comes a duty. To ask ourselves if what we are doing is genuinely transformative. Can we prove that we have made a difference? Can we demonstrate the effectiveness of what we have done with other people’s money? Can we prove that the regulations and agencies we have established have made clear, demonstrable, measurable, improvements to the lives of others? And can we prove that in a way that our fellow citizens can recognise and appreciate?

I ask, because I am conscious, in line with the starting imperative of FDR’s reform mission, just how distant, in so many senses, Government is from the people.

It is not just that all major Government departments are based in London, with the impact that concentration of senior jobs has on our economy. It is also the case that Westminster and Whitehall can become a looking-glass world. Government departments recruit in their own image, are influenced by the think tanks and lobbyists who breathe the same London air and are socially rooted in assumptions which are inescapably metropolitan. There is a tendency, and I am certainly not immune to it, to see success in Government measured by the sound of applause in the village, not the weight we lift from others’ distant shoulders. Favourable media commentary, pressure group plaudits, peer group approval, they all drive activity. But what is less often felt is the pressure to show, over time, that programmes have been effective and enduring. Of the 108 major programmes for which Government is responsible, only 8% are actually assessed to judge if they have been delivered effectively and have brought about the desired effects.

Of course we politicians are principally to blame. We go for the sugar rush that comes from announcing radical initiatives, unveiling dramatic overhauls, launching new spending programmes, ramping up this and rolling out that. Done right, such moments can galvanise the system into action. But at times we risk the hunger for new policy announcements becoming insatiable.

And there is also a tendency in Government to applaud the gracefully performative and overlook the boringly transformative. Inclusive lanyards, progressive hashtags and high-sounding declarations from champions of this-and-that good cause are often signals of noble intent, but they are no substitute for improving exam performance for children from under-performing ethnic minorities, enhancing the ability of prisons to rehabilitate prisoners or shifting our economic model to see higher returns to labour and fewer opportunities for rent-seeking.

Tackling these challenges isn’t easy. Worthwhile things seldom are. But we can begin by changing important ways in which we work in Government.

We can, literally, reduce the distance between Government and people by relocating Government decision-making centres to different parts of our United Kingdom. And in doing so we should be striving to reflect the full diversity of our United Kingdom. Why shouldn’t some of the policymakers intimately involved in reshaping our approach to energy and the decarbonisation of our economy be in Teesside, Humberside and Aberdeen? Shouldn’t those thinking about this sector be part of the communities whose jobs depend on getting these decisions right?

And why are so many of those charged with developing our tax and welfare policies still based in London?

Wouldn’t it be better for those deciding how taxpayers’ money is spent to be living and working alongside those citizens across the country, from Mansfield to Middlesbrough to Merthyr Tydfil, for whom every pound in tax is a significant inroad into their income? Should we not also be better at recruiting our policymakers from those overlooked and hitherto undervalued communities?

There have been relocations of Government in the past but they have generally been to cities such as Bristol and Sheffield, with a particular socio-economic profile and a particularly large proportion of existing university graduates. We need to be more ambitious for Newcastle, for Teesside and Teesdale, for North Wales, for the North-East of Scotland, for East Lancashire, for West Bromwich.

I also think we need to look at how we can develop an even more thoughtful approach to devolution, to urban leadership and to allowing communities to take back more control of the policies that matter to them. One of the glories of the United States is that there are fifty Governors, all of whom can be public policy innovators. As so often, diversity is strength.

And an important part of bringing Government closer to people is making sure we have not just a wider spread of decision-making across the country but a broader and deeper pool of decision-makers.

Groupthink can affect any organisation – the tendency to coalesce around a cosy consensus, to resist change, look for information to confirm existing biases and to reject rigorous testing of delivery. It is the opposite of the bold, restless experimentation FDR called for. And it is particularly likely to occur when people are drawn from similar backgrounds. Indeed, as the academic Jonathan Haidt has pointed out, when you get a critical mass of people in any organisation who have got similar outlooks, biases and preferences the minority who may dissent become progressively more uncomfortable about doing so.

The more that fluent, intelligent, kind and sensitive people explain that the Emperor’s New Clothes are a thoughtful co-creation blending public and private sector expertise from the textile and non-textile communities, and these have been benchmarked against international norms and sensitive to both body positivity feedback and non-judgemental protocols concerning the tone-policing of issues around personal space, the less likely someone is to say the guy is naked.

Which is why, as we strive to diversify the Government’s presence across the United Kingdom, we should also seek to diversify the talent pool from which we draw. How can we in Government be less southern, less middle class, less reliant on those with social science qualifications and more welcoming to those with physical science and mathematical qualifications – how can we be less anywhere and more somewhere – closer to the 52% who voted to Leave, and more understanding of why?

Almost every arm of Government, and those with powerful voices within it, seemed estranged from the majority in 2016. That is not to say their views were not honest, principled and public-spirited. It is just to observe that a view, a perspective, a set of beliefs, which the majority, albeit slight, held in this country were rarely heard within Government. FDR asked his Government to remember the Forgotten Man. In the 2016 referendum those who had been too often forgotten asked to be remembered.

And as well as valuing a diversity of views we should also, as I implied earlier, value a diversity of skills. The manner in which Government has rewarded its workers for many years now has, understandably, prized cognitive skills – the analytical, evaluative and, perhaps, above all, the presentational. I believe that should change. Delivery on the ground; making a difference in the community; practicable, measurable improvements in the lives of others should matter more.

Public servants, including those who work for private sector organisations delivering public goods, such as those in the care sector, waste and refuse disposal, and the people who keep our hospitals hygienic and safe, should be at the centre of our policy-making. They are the people who have given so much in the recent crisis and represent the best in every community.

Now of course we need to promote economic growth in everything we do. But the purpose of economic growth is to build a more civilised society. As the Prime Minister has consistently argued, we should be a pro-worker, pro-public servant People’s Government.

The second Rooseveltian challenge is to change how Government itself works, to reorganise its institutions to become better at reform. The need for reform in so many areas is obvious. And this Government is determined to deliver it in a way that is consistent with our moral values.

We know that we need to make opportunity more equal. We need to make productivity gains across our country more equitable. We need a just transition to a lower carbon world. We need to confront and stamp out racism wherever we find it. We need to heal and unite our country in the face of division and polarisation around identity. We need to make the twin virtues of earning and belonging work for others, and we need to ensure that solidarity across communities defeats the forces of division and dependence which dissolve the ties that bind.

At the heart of our programme must be a focus on what works – what actually helps our fellow citizens to flourish.

And that means, as I have emphasised, rigorous evaluation of Government programmes. What value do they add? What incentives do they provide for better performance and better service to others? The Treasury in the UK has been, historically, very good at questioning the cost of projects, but not their broader social value. Asking that question is not an evasion of Government responsibility but an embrace of it. And politicians like me must take responsibility for the effect of their actions and the consequences of their announcements.

I helped set up National Citizen Service. It is a noble ideal. But by what criteria do we judge it a success? The numbers who have signed up, and the warmth they feel about the programme, are welcome. But what has society, measurably, achieved for that expenditure?

I am proud to have played a part in setting up the Free Schools programme in England along with Lord Hill. But it is important to ask what, measurably and consistently, we have achieved over ten years through that investment.

In the aftermath of the 2011 riots I pressed for a range of reforms. But however well-intentioned they all were we need to be honest and self-critical about their progress. Have the Gangs Taskforce and the use of Gang Injunctions made young people safer and helped young people out of the Criminal Justice System?

One of the reforms of which I am proudest was the introduction of the Pupil Premium to support disadvantaged children with additional funding. I believe it has been transformative. But we need hard, testable, data on how it has worked. How well have we captured how effectively it is spent in the best schools and how are we setting about analysing what lessons to learn elsewhere?

To answer these questions properly, indeed to use the answers to drive improvement in all public services, requires Government to change. First, Government needs to be rigorous and fearless in its evaluation of policy and projects. And in doing so, we need to ask not only questions about spending per se, but about effectiveness against ambition. It may well be legitimate to say that Government wants to spend a large amount to achieve an incremental improvement in a specific area for a vulnerable set of people – such as support for children in care. But the crucial question is what benefits have the extra spending and attention brought?

That is not penny-pinching. It’s a real concern that the vulnerable benefit from this additional expenditure. What are the metrics against which improvement will be judged? How are appropriate tools such as randomised controlled trials being deployed to assess the difference being made? How do we guard against gaming and confirmation bias? All across Government at the moment that widespread rigour is missing.

Which is just one of the reasons why the machinery needs to change.

Government needs to evaluate data more rigorously and that means opening up data so others can judge the effectiveness of programmes as well. We need proper challenge from qualified outsiders.

If Government ensures its departments and agencies share and publish data far more, then data analytics specialists can help us more rigorously to evaluate policy successes and delivery failures. People’s privacy of course must be protected. But once suitably anonymised, it is imperative that we learn the hugely valuable lessons that lie buried in our data.

We also need to ask in those areas where our data is world class, as with the NHS, how we can use that to power scientific breakthroughs. Suitably anonymised, as I say, the deep and broad pool of health data we have can improve diagnostics and treatment, support life science innovation and close the health inequality gap.

And, perhaps most importantly, Government must also ask itself if its people have the skills necessary for the challenges that I have set out.

For many decades now we have neglected to ensure the Civil Service has all the basic skills required to serve Government, and our citizens, well.

There are many brilliant people in our civil service, and I have never come across any civil servant who did not want to do his or her best for the country. But, nevertheless, there are a limited number, even in the Senior Civil Service, who have qualifications or expertise in mathematical, statistical and probability questions – and these are essential to public policy decisions. As governments in developed nations go, we in the UK are lagging behind many others in terms of numerical proficiency. But so many policy and implementation decisions depend on understanding mathematical reasoning.

That means we need to reform not just recruitment, but training. We need to ensure more policy makers and decision makers feel comfortable discussing the Monte Carlo method or Bayesian statistics, more of those in Government are equipped to read a balance sheet and discuss what constitutes an appropriate return on investment, more are conversant with the commercial practices of those from whom we procure services and can negotiate the right contracts and enforce them appropriately.

I should of course add that it is important that those of us who are politicians have the knowledge, skills, and indeed humility, to be able to ask the right questions and then seek to understand the answers. Reforming how Government works requires ministers who can reform themselves.

And the need for appropriate skills, training and knowledge within Whitehall goes much further than the areas I have mentioned. Submissions, the papers which are prepared to guide ministerial decisions, and which were once the glory of our Civil Service, have become in far too many cases formulaic, over-long, jargon-heavy and back-covering. The ability to make a tight, evidence-rich, fact-based, argument which doesn’t waste words or evade hard choices is critical to effective Government. As is deep, domain-specific, knowledge.

The Prime Minister has rightly argued that foreign policy-making is often weakened by the lack of deep knowledge of the language, culture and history of the nations with whom we are negotiating or whom we seek to influence.

And as William Hague has pointed out, the decision to close the Foreign Office language school was an act of national self-harm and his restoration of it, along with his establishment of a new Diplomatic Academy, was a necessary renovation.

That same determination to instil and to cultivate deep knowledge should apply across Government. Too much current Civil Service training is about vapid abstractions such as ‘Collaborating Better’ rather than about what works in classroom instruction or how to interrogate climate modelling or to find out what really goes on in the preparation of Crown Prosecution cases which leads to so many cracked trials.

Of course, the vast majority of civil servants strive mightily to master the policy or delivery area that they are asked to cover. And I owe a personal debt to many great civil servants who have helped secure lasting change, who have warned me off foolish initiatives and who have demonstrated the very best in rigorous policy thinking. But there are systemic problems which mean that we often lose institutional memory and fail to build on hard-won success.

With the exception of a few bodies such as the Education Endowment Foundation there are precious few Government-sponsored or owned sources of reliable evidence on what works.

And the current structure of the Civil Service career ladder means that promotion comes from switching roles, and departments, with determined regularity. Just at the point that an official at the Department for International Trade who is a deputy director masters the intricacies of tariff schedules and their impact on important UK sectors and can recognise the opportunities that arise from liberalisation with Ruritania, he or she, if they want to progress in their career, then goes on to become a director in, say, the Department for Education overhauling child protection.

Commentators, rightly, criticise the rapid turnover of ministers and the seemingly random reshuffle of Parliamentary Under-Secretaries for Paperclips after just a year to become Ministers of State for Paper Files. But far less noticed and just as, if not more, damaging, is the whirligig of Civil Service transfers and promotions.

We must be able to promote those with proven expertise in their current role to perform the same, or similar, functions with greater status and higher rewards without them thinking they have to move away from the areas they know and love to rise in their profession. We would not ask an Orthopaedics Registrar to become a psychiatrist in order to make consultant. So why should we require an expert in agriculture negotiations with the EU to supervise the Universal Credit IT system in order to see their career progress? So, if we are to make the most of the amazing talent that we have in such abundance in the Civil Service, we need to both train better and incentivise more smartly. And we need to ensure that those in Government have access to teaching which develops deep knowledge.

We know already from evidence of what works in education and the classroom that mastery of deep knowledge is the precondition of creativity and open-mindedness. Confident musical literacy, achieved after learning to read scores and to practise scales, allows them to move from laborious application to automatic performance, and mastering it allows the performer to become not just the passive reciter of others’ achievements but the author of original new work of quality and merit. Similarly, if those in Government have deep subject knowledge they move from reciters of the jargon generated by producer interests into the creators of original policy that serve the widest possible public interest.

That is why we need to ensure that we have a proper, and properly-resourced campus for training those in Government. One which is not preoccupied with the latest coaching theology or sub-business school jargon but equips the many hugely talented people within the Civil Service to become as knowledgeable in their policy areas as consultant surgeons, chancery barristers and biochemistry professors are in theirs. And, more than that, we need to ensure that basic writing, meeting chairing and time management skills are de rigueur for all policy civil servants.

The third Rooseveltian imperative I have invoked is the bias towards experimentation. And this is perhaps the hardest to achieve.

There are so many barriers to doing things differently in Government, and so many incentives to play safe that it is difficult to know where to start.

It is a cliché to say of Government that no-one ever lost their job for recommending the contract go to IBM.

If you decide that you will procure services from a new organisation and, if things go wrong, you will face the wrath of the National Audit Office, the criticism of self-righteous chairs of parliamentary select committees, the hindsight-rich rancour of newspaper columnists as well as the disappointed froideur of your Permanent Secretary and Secretary of State.

On the other hand, if you choose to have the service performed by an established supplier, choose to assess their performance by deferring to management consultants, set up a board to manage the process with officials from lots of different departments then you are insulated from failure. The delivery companies are too big to fail, too embedded in so much else that Government does, too sanctified by the faith other departments have already placed in them. The consultants are an invaluable prophylactic – if these super bright people from the private sector with MBA degrees and huge earnings outside said it was okay, well, it must have been. And the cross-Whitehall board is the biggest insurance policy of all. You can’t hold me accountable – it was a ‘shared’ decision.

All of these factors work against innovation – and accountability. Innovation comes when people take reasonable risks – and also responsibility. We need to move to a system where those who propose the innovative, the different, the challenging, are given room to progress and, if necessary, fail. But we must then ensure that we learn quickly, adjust and respond.

In my time in politics I have got many things wrong. But I have, most of the time, been blessed by the ability of Prime Ministers to forgive, provided I learned the lesson.

That is why it is the responsibility of those in positions of political leadership – myself chief among them – to support those who try something different and defend them if, at first, it doesn’t work. And then to ensure we learn why and do better next time.

My first attempt as Education Secretary at a new history curriculum was deeply flawed, but the challenge it provoked improved on everything that had gone before. My cancellation of the Brown government’s Building Schools for the Future programme was a political fiasco, but it led to a method of commissioning new school buildings that saved the taxpayer billions. My proposal to bring back O-Levels strained the bonds of the 2010-2015 coalition and it had to be abandoned but it led to a significant improvement in GCSE standards and school performance.

I should add that those GCSE reforms only worked because of the leadership of two outstanding public servants – Dame Glenys Stacey and Amanda Spielman – who ran the exams watchdog Ofqual at the time. They stood firm in the face of orchestrated opposition from those who wanted standards lowered, and they helped end grade inflation. Exam reform was a rocky road but they made the experiment work.

We need, as a Government, to create the space for the experimental and to acknowledge we won’t always achieve perfection on Day One. We will throw everything at increasing ventilator capacity, some projects will misfire, some will seem promising but fall at the final hurdle, but along the way we will end up with unexpected gains, and as we have seen in the past few months, a willingness to experiment will help drive up a huge increase in ventilator capacity.

There is of course also a particular merit also in investing in the literal experimentation of pure science. As the success of DARPA in the US shows, sometimes by design, and sometimes by obliquity, hugely beneficial innovation can occur. Of course, some of the projects in which DARPA has invested have failed and foundered, but the knowledge that high ambition is supported and incentivised and wrong turnings accepted as necessary costs along the way has clearly brought huge benefits.

Sadly far too often, innovation in Government is treated as though it were a mischief rather than a model. The default mechanism of the National Audit Office, Public Accounts Committee, other select committees and various commentators is that any departure from the status quo must be assumed to be more downside than upside. Had they been able to interrogate George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton in 1783 they would have concluded that American independence was an expensive, untried and unjustifiable innovation. In Treasury terms they would have said it was novel and contentious and therefore should be stopped.

The whole culture of Government, and the wider world of political commentary, is hostile to risk, adventure, experimentation and novelty. But the experience of FDR and his administration was that it was only through big risks, and radical experiments, that progress could be assured. Many of the programmes initiated as part of the New Deal failed on their own terms. But, overall, the re-orientation of Government to help the Forgotten Man, to restore hope in place of fear, to change Government so it worked for all citizens and to be bold and restless in experimentation of new ways of working succeeded.

That is why now, as is our intention as Government, we should reform planning rules to fast track beautiful development, we should pioneer biodiversity net gain to offset any adverse consequences of development, we should better use anonymised NHS data to improve healthcare delivery, we should allow parents and others to compare schools on value added, exam entries and attendance, among other factors, we should compare individual courts, judges and CPS managers on their efficacy on processing cases, we should look at how successful individual prisons are at delivering education and rehabilitation programmes, and we should compare that with re-offending rates, we should assess the effectiveness of anti-radicalisation programmes, we should ask what value for money gains the Troubled Families Programme has secured, we should interrogate the basis on which defence procurement contracts are considered value for money and by who, and we should ask how we judge the real impact of development spending, and I could go on…

The heart of my case, as I hope everyone now appreciates, is simple.

Faith in conventional political parties, their leadership and their allies in business has been broken.

Failures of policy and judgment have put previously existing elites in the dock.

Their misjudgements, in the eyes of many, have been compounded by cultural condescension and insulation from accountability.

The concerns of our fellow citizens are real. They matter. Their analysis is resonant. To carry on rejecting it will only weaken our politics and strengthen division.

We have faced similar, though not identical, crises, before.

To face the crisis honestly, we must change.

Confronted with a similar, though not identical, challenge in the 1930s FDR identified three critical needs: first, to make the Forgotten Man – i.e. the victim of crisis and inequality - our first concern; second, to transform Government to make it the efficient force for good the times command; and third, experiment and explore different routes in a crisis in order to escape with an emphasis on risk-taking.

I defy anyone now to say that the scale of the challenges our governments face are lesser than those faced by FDR in 1933, or the scale of change required is smaller. If the suggestions for change I have put forward are wrong, or mistaken, which they may honestly be, I hope the response is to call for greater radicalism not less. We should always be receptive to bold new policy proposals. And now in Government we must listen to ideas on transforming how we deliver, such as those from GovernUp and the Commission for Smart Government which it will shortly launch, because we surely know the machinery of government is no longer equal to the challenges of today. We owe change to the people we serve.

Every morning I wake up saddened by the fact we haven’t done more to make the most of every talent in our land, reproaching myself that we did not do more in children’s social care, primary schooling and secondary schooling to provide opportunities and keep young people safe. I worry that we have not succeeded in reforming the youth justice system, the police, the CPS and the courts. But we can do better, we can redeem souls, we can save lives through public sector reform. If money is rightly directed, properly authorised and its spending effectively evaluated then massive progress can be made.

Let me end on a personal note. I am in public service, as an MP and Government Minister, because I want to tackle inequality. I have other passions – the environment, culture, sport. But my driving mission in politics is to make opportunity more equal. I want to ensure that whatever their background, every child has the chance to succeed, and nothing we do should hold them back. It is on that basis I make my case and on which I am happy to be judged.

Related content

Is this page useful.

• Yes this page is useful
• No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) .

Remarks of Senator John F. Kennedy, Rockefeller Public Service Awards Luncheon, Washington D.C., April 30, 1958

I am greatly honored to participate in this annual presentation luncheon for the Rockefeller public service awards. My sense of privilege is heightened by the distinction of these annual awards, by the distinction of this program and those responsible for it and by the distinction of those recipients whom we honor today.

The opportunity which has now been granted to them is, I am certain, unprecedented in their lifetime – and it will never be offered again.

It is not, however, an opportunity for mere personal enrichment. We are confident that in the year ahead they will benefit in such a way as to benefit us all in the years to come. We are confident that they will bring new vision, new wisdom, and a new stimulus back to the musty halls of Washington officialdom as the result of their observations and learning during the coming year.

I know that these recipients whom we honor today will bring some learning back with them – that they will be better fitted to meet the challenge of our age. Certainly our Government and our people have never stood so acutely in need of developing in full the talents of our ablest public servants. We have long been accustomed to the practice of elevating talented scholars in the public service.

But a growing disdain for public service in our Nation as a whole and in our colleges in particular has been coupled with a trend for increasing complexity of national problems. We must secure the services of the best minds of our Nation – and expand the horizons of those career servants who have demonstrated their distinction – if we are to cope with the staggering burdens of discouraging and puzzling problems that now confront us. This is not time for overspecialized public servants who are unable to ride easily over broad fields of knowledge.

On the contrary, we need career servants especially trained to meet the critical issues of our time – issues which have become both so immense and so complex that the experts disagree and the laymen throw up their hands. Think, if you will, of the technical competence necessary to enable one to make an informed judgment on the desirability of suspending atomic tests, on the necessity of establishing missile bases abroad, on the effort worth devoting to reaching the moon, on the disposition of our agricultural surpluses, on the stabilization of the world's currencies and a whole host of other problems. Some of our problems are so familiar that we have almost taken their existence for granted – we have in effect despaired of ever ending mental illness or social tensions or juvenile delinquency or business cycles.

The fact remains that the American people lack the information and training necessary to make an informed judgment on many of those issues; and we in the Congress, ill housed and ill staffed, are not much better equipped to deal with them effectively. We are dependent upon alert, informed, resourceful, and objective guidance from our civil servants. If they, too, lack the necessary opportunities for training and growth, then we will be reduced to the "blind leading the blind" – or, to put it more precisely in the case of our most difficult issues, the bland leading the bland.

I do not say that a year in college will work miracles for our public servants.

But it is no exaggeration to say that whether or not the Battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton, the struggle in which we are now engaged will be won or lost in the classrooms of America.

And what should be of concern to us today is that there are so few who are to be given this opportunity – that even these awards are available only because of the foresight and philanthropy of John D. Rockefeller – and that this program is one of a limited duration.

The Rockefeller Foundation and family have recognized – perhaps more than any comparable group – the usefulness of what the economists like to call "seed capital." They have pioneered in the establishment of new projects and programs – not as permanent monuments but as pilot projects. They have established task forces or initiated ventures in order to demonstrate what can and should be done by the rest of the Nation. These undertakings have stimulated our awareness and action in a number of fields – in medicine and public health, in education, the arts, and elsewhere.

But certainly one of their finest contributions has been to the strengthening of our career public service. The awards and training program we honor today is built in a sense upon a similar precedent which the foundation set a generation ago. Under the auspices of the National Institute of Public Affairs, the cream of our college talent was attracted to Washington and to an internship in government service. Those interns today hold top positions in the Government or in educational, industrial, or professional activities closely identified with it.

That experiment was successful – its value to the whole Nation became apparent – and the idea first conceived by the foundation was adopted by the Government as its continuing responsibility. The junior management training and executive development programs administered by the Civil Service commission and the various departments have enlarged upon this original and decisive model of the Rockefeller Foundation. And the result has been the most imaginative program of recruitment ever devised in this country for creating a strong backbone to the professional career service.

Today we witness another successful program established by Mr. John D. Rockefeller III, in association with Princeton University. This program, too, has blazed a trail for the public service – and this program, too, deserves to be adopted by the Federal Government.

In a sense, the Rockefeller public service awards have a double purpose: The first is to provide a reward for merit and to recognize distinguished service. This aim has already been reinforced within the Government by the Presidential awards to distinguished civil servants begun this year

But the second aim has not yet been secured, though it lies within reach – and that is to spotlight the needs to continued training of career servants – to emphasize the value of their maintaining up-to-date competence, renewing their relationships with the scholars and researchers who are in their field of specialty extending the frontiers of knowledge – to take men in middle life, who have gone far in a relatively narrow field, and broaden their outlook, then use them in positions of still broader scope and responsibility. Given new incentives, for advancement, a new environment, an opportunity for a fresh exchange of ideas and constructive criticism, these men have been enabled to move out of the ruts of routine. Their contribution to the public good is greater – and at the same time our Government has retained the services of highly and often expensively trained public servants.

This concept of additional training and experience for the advanced career man is not unique, of course. It is not a new device to ease the lot of bureaucrats or spend the taxpayer's money. Lawyers, doctors, and other professional men avail themselves of private opportunities to recharge their batteries, so to speak.

The tradition of the sabbatical in the field of education – for intellectual retooling and extension of skills and research – is now well established. In industry, too, there is a growing recognition that men in middle life can benefit enormously from the change and pause of an educational environment. In my state the School for Industrial Management at MIT, and the program of advanced management at Harvard, have been foremost in contributing to these new developments in executive training. The Bell Telephone Co. and the University of Pennsylvania are associated in a program of liberal education for its higher executives. Indeed, most large industries are now actively considering new ways by which the rich resources of our educational institutions can be mobilized for the broadened training of career executives.

Yet the record in our Government is a spotty one, to say the least. The Foreign Service, the military services, and a few departments do have limited authority to send personnel to universities for tours of training and advanced education. Yet there are many departments which cannot, under current law, enrich their personnel standards, and stimulate their most promising men and woman, through providing this kind of educational leave and training. The Rockefeller awards have made it possible for only a few.

The value of this program is now undeniable. Those whom we honor today, to be sure, are an exceptional few – but there are potentially many, many more. We cannot expect the Rockefeller program to do the job alone – or forever. It is high time that the Congress adopted this Rockefeller program, also. It is high time that we offered this kind of opportunity to our most talented, promising, and devoted career servants – to benefit those who receive its grants, to benefit those who strive for it, to benefit all of the career service, the Congress that makes so many demands upon it, and the public that so often wrongfully abuses it.

It is high time that we acted – that we nourish the seed first planted in this program so many years ago. And I know of no more appropriate year to act than 1958 – the year which marks the 75th anniversary of the civil service. Here is the ideal backdrop against which congress should act. Training is the only broad area of public personnel administration for which this Congress has not passed any legislation. Yet we are, as I indicated earlier, on the brink of action.

Through the leadership of the able Senator Joe Clark, the Senate has passed S. 385. It is a training bill which gives the broad authority required by most agencies and permits its flexible administration. The main features of the bill have been supported by the President, the Bureau of the Budget, the Civil Service Commission, and the personnel directors of most agencies.

I am hopeful that the Senate and House can soon reconcile their differences in a sensible compromise – and that Mr. Rockefeller's seed capital can give momentum to a sustained and flexible training program in our Government.

The enactment of such a program will mark a turning point, in my opinion, in the attitude of the government toward the intellectual capacity of its employees. In recent years we have scoffed at intellectuals in Government, isolated them, and refused to finance their research. We drove them out of the career service or discouraged them from ever entering. And today the Soviets have seized the initiative in intellectual achievements and prestige, with telling results – not because they captured German scientists but because we neglected American scientists. Because Mr. Wilson wasn't interested in basic research as to why certain chemical substances turned green – and now we're finding out too late why certain nations turn Red. Did anyone else in history ever think the best way to prepare for a crucial battle was to blow his own brains out?

Today we need new ideas, new techniques, statesmen, politicians, and civil servants willing to take the lead in new fields. We are moving ahead along a knife-edged path which requires leadership better equipped than any since Lincoln's day to make clear to our people the vast spectrum of our challenges.

The question is whether a democratic society, with its freedom of choice, its breadth of opportunity, its range of alternatives, can meet the single-minded advance of the Communists.

Our decisions are more subtle than dramatic. Our far-flung interests are more complex than consistent, our crises more chronic than easily solved.

Can a nation organized and governed such as ours endure? That is the real question. Have we the nerve and the will? Have we got what it takes to carry through in an age where, as never before, our very survival is at stake, where we and the Russians have the power to destroy one-quarter of the earth's population, a feat not accomplished since Cain slew Abel? Can we carry through in an age where we will witness not only new breakthroughs in weapons of destruction – but also a race for mastery of the sky and the rain, the ocean and the tides, the inside of the earth and the inside of men's minds?

In the words of Woodrow Wilson: "We must neither run with the crowd nor deride it – but seek sober counsel for it – and for ourselves."

Source : Papers of John F. Kennedy. Pre-Presidential Papers. Senate Files, Box 901,  "Rockefeller Public Service Awards, Washington, D.C., 30 April 1958."  John F. Kennedy Presidential Library.

• Partnership for Public Service
• Best Places to Work
• Center for Presidential Transition

Go Government

Service to america medals.

• Overview and Strategy
• Board and History
• Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
• Work with Us
• Our Supporters
• Our Solutions
• Roadmap for Renewing our Federal Government
• Customer Experience
• Employee Engagement
• Innovation and Technology Modernization
• Leadership and Collaboration
• Presidential Transition
• Rebuilding Trust in Government
• Recognition
• Performance Measures
• Agency Performance Dashboard
• Best Places to Work in the Federal Government®
• Fed Figures
• Leadership 360 Assessment 
• Political Appointee Tracker
• Trust in Government Dashboard
• Public Service Leadership Institute®
• Public Service Leadership Model
• Leadership Training
• Read, Watch and Listen
• Latest Releases
• Search this site

Public Service Recognition Week

• Gratitude Wall

Public Service Recognition Week is celebrated the first week of May since 1985 (beginning on the first Sunday of the month) to honor the people who serve our nation as federal, state, county, local and tribal government employees.

Sign up for Public Service Recognition Week

By signing up for PSRW, you will be featured on the participating organizations page below and will receive PSRW updates and materials.

Thank a Public Servant

Our government leaders say thank you to our public servants who create positive impacts on our lives every day. We encourage you to participate in our gratitude wall by sharing your story about a public servant who has personally impacted your life and whom you would like to thank.

Resources for Individuals

Tune in to the Profiles in Public Service podcast, which shares compelling stories about the public servant leaders driving government’s most important accomplishments and impacting communities across the country.

Our 2024 finalists will be announced Sunday, May 5th. Learn more about the program, register for updates and read the stories of our honorees

Explore the federal hiring process 

This site is designed to be your guide as you consider, apply, and secure federal employment. We’ll help you research federal agencies and government careers as well as provide practical tips for completing your application.

Five Stories of Public Service

Every other Wednesday, our new newsletter will share five stories that highlight the ways in which civil servants working in cities and towns across the country are keeping us safe, healthy and prosperous.

Resources for Organizations

Submit a psrw event.

Share your event with us to be listed on our events page. 

#GovPossible Campaign

Do you know a team of public servants or an individual who has done exceptional work this past year? Have they made the impossible possible? The Performance.gov team invites you to celebrate PSRW by sharing what public servants do each day to make things #GovPossible!  

FEB Award Winners 2024

The Federal Executive Boards (FEBs) are the cornerstone of Federal presence across the United States. Currently organized into 26 boards, across four regions, with plans for expansion, they form a bridge between Washington, DC and local Federal communities.  

Call to Serve

Our Call to Serve Network—the only national system that collaborates with both federal agencies and hundreds of higher education institutions—works to promote federal service and recruit the next generation of public servants.

Message for Trust Tip Sheet

Read about the eight ways federal agencies can communicate more effectively to build greater trust in government.

#IServeBecause

“While making an impact within public service is often a marathon and not a sprint, knowing that my work makes a difference is something I value tremendously. While it may not be glamorous to ensure publicly funded programs are correctly managed and taxpayer money is handled correctly, it comes with a tremendous sense of duty I have not experienced in the private sector.”

Kyle B., GSA

“Public service is important to me because I like helping people, especially those who may be at greater risk to physical or environmental hazards. I also find it important to be a voice for that which can’t speak up for itself – namely the natural environment: plants, trees, rivers, lakes and animals of all kind.”

Bryan F., EPA

“I worked for years in the private sector, and I was never satisfied; although, I was well paid. My country is important to me, and public service allows me to join the fight to keep our country and the Constitution alive!”

Amy M., DOD

“I believe it is very important to take care of the people not only in our country, but also in the communities in which we live. I think if it were not for our public service personnel, this country wouldn’t be able to continue to function and go on as it has during this crisis and every crisis that has occurred before it.”

Sonsauray D., IRS

Public Service Recognition Week is hosted annually by the Public Employees Roundtable and its member organizations.

Council of Former Federal Executives (COFFE)

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

David Cameron's speech on public service

The recent disasters in the Home Office have contributed to a stereotype of public sector inefficiency and lack of commitment.

Of course there are serious problems in the quality of administration in this country.

But let's not tar the whole of the public sector with the same brush.

I want to challenge the idea that the public sector is somehow synonymous with an underachieving, couldn't-care-less attitude.

That may be the exception but today I want to concentrate on the rule.

The Conservative Party has always focused, rightly, on giving taxpayers value for money and reducing burdens on the state.

But in our legitimate desire to drive out government waste and improve public sector efficiency, we have sometimes risked giving the impression that we see those who work in the public sector as burdens on the state rather than dedicated professionals who work hard to improve the quality of people's lives.

Anyone working in the public services could easily have heard a pretty negative message from my Party: "there's too many of you, you're lazy and you're inefficient." This is far from how I see things.

Public service - the concept of working for the good of the community - is a high ideal. We see it in our doctors and nurses, our police officers and our soldiers.

But we also see it in many, many areas of our civil service and local government. Yet this is rarely, if ever, acknowledged.

When I hear MPs bashing bureaucrats - and I'm sure I've done it myself - I often think that what they're really complaining about is some idiotic bit of red tape that has landed on the desk of the blameless public servant.

And when I hear Ministers bashing bureaucrats - or declaring that their departments are 'not fit for purpose' - I wish they'd have the decency to admit that very often it's their policies that are at fault, not the people who work for them.

Instead of using public servants as scapegoats we should acknowledge their successes.

The truth is that public servants are privately dedicated to what they do. To them, it's not just work - it's their vocation. Often it's not just their job - it's their life.

Think about what the term "public service" actually means.

It signifies two clear things: that something is being provided for the public, and that it is a service.

So if we want to improve public services for everyone, we need to think hard about what makes good service and what doesn't. In the current political debate about public services, I don't think there's nearly enough thought given to this vital question.

Too often these days, there seems to be an automatic and lazy assumption that you get terrible service in the public sector and fantastic service in the private sector.

You regularly hear politicians and commentators going on about "bringing private sector efficiency to public services" - for example sending in private sector 'hit squads' to teach hospitals how to perform better.

There's a widespread assumption that we should always and everywhere encourage the public sector to adopt the techniques and the style of service found in the private sector. Of course we want the public sector to adopt best practice in terms of cost-savings, modern management and successful, cutting-edge business models. But that's not the whole story.

The quality of service that someone gets doesn't depend primarily on whether that service is being provided by the private sector or the public sector.

It depends on a whole range of things that affect the people who are actually delivering the service.

Whether they're well led.

Whether they're motivated.

Whether they have the resources to give good service.

Whether they're trusted to use their personal skills, experience and discretion to do a good job.

These are some of the things we'll be looking at with the National Consumer Council.

We want to learn first-hand from consumers what they think makes for good service, whether the service is delivered by the private sector, the public sector - or indeed the voluntary sector.

And we want to understand what lessons the public sector may have for the private sector, instead of the automatic and lazy assumption that it's always the public sector that has to learn from the private.

If we're sensible about this, we'd recognise that in our everyday lives, we receive all kinds of service from people and organisations in all sectors - and that the quality varies hugely.

In my life, I've received amazing service from the public sector - with a quality of care and commitment that you do not always find in the private sector.

But I've also seen shoddy, careless service that's enough to drive you crazy - both in the public sector and in the private.

I'm sure that most people share this mixed experience of both sectors.

The idea that the private sector has a monopoly on great service just doesn't fit the reality of most people's lives. Ask anyone who's been pushed from pillar to post for days and weeks on end when dealing with their bank, or insurance company, or utility.

So instead of constantly beating up on the public sector and telling it to be more like the private sector, let's be more reasonable and constructive.

Let's understand what it is that enables people to give the public great service - whether they work for a private company or the state - and encourage more of those things.

My instinctive belief is that if you trust people to do their jobs, if you trust in their professionalism and expertise, if you set a clear framework and then avoid constantly looking over their shoulder, and if you show that they're valued and respected, then they will give great service.

That's the direction we're taking in our Policy Review.

We believe we can improve public services by trusting public servants more.

And I think that the private sector, rightly concerned with profits and the bottom line, could learn a lot from the public sector.

Not just about dedication to the common good, but also about efficiency and good practice.

So let's stop the knee-jerk attacks on public sector workers and focus on what really matters - improving the quality of service in our lives, whoever is providing it.

• Conservatives
• David Cameron

Most viewed

Company Filings | More Search Options

Company Filings More Search Options -->

• Commissioners
• Reports and Publications
• Securities Laws
• Commission Votes
• Corporation Finance
• Enforcement
• Investment Management
• Economic and Risk Analysis
• Trading and Markets
• Office of Administrative Law Judges
• Examinations
• Litigation Releases
• Administrative Proceedings
• Opinions and Adjudicatory Orders
• Accounting and Auditing
• Trading Suspensions
• How Investigations Work
• Receiverships
• Information for Harmed Investors
• Rulemaking Activity
• Proposed Rules
• Final Rules
• Interim Final Temporary Rules
• Other Orders and Notices
• Self-Regulatory Organizations
• Staff Interpretations
• Investor Education
• Small Business Capital Raising
• EDGAR – Search & Access
• EDGAR – Information for Filers
• Company Filing Search
• How to Search EDGAR
• About EDGAR
• Press Releases
• Speeches and Statements
• Securities Topics
• Upcoming Events
• Media Gallery
• Divisions & Offices
• Public Statements

Public Service: An Obligation and Opportunity for Lawyers

Chair mary jo white.

Association of American Law Schools Annual Meeting, Showcase Speaker Program, Washington D.C.

Jan. 3, 2015

Thank you, for that excellent introduction.

I am truly honored to have been asked to be the inaugural speaker in your Showcase Speaker Program.  This is an impressive forum for a serious discussion of the most important issues affecting law schools and the legal profession.  And the theme of this year’s annual meeting – “Legal Education at the Crossroads” – is an apt description of the critical juncture we are facing in 2015.

Many of the challenges confronting law schools today are well-known.  Enrollment of first-year law students has not been this low since 1973, the year before I graduated from law school. [1]   And while the job market for law school graduates has improved over the last few years, the financial crisis resulted in fundamental structural and market changes to more than just our financial system.  There have been lasting changes to the legal job market that may, in the long-run, affect the educational choices of college graduates and the economic models of many of our law schools.  I know you are studying these changes carefully and strategizing for the “new normal” and the financial challenges that come with it – for both students and your institutions.

One positive by-product of the market changes, however, has been the steady, perhaps slightly increased, number of recent law graduates employed in the public and public interest sectors. [2]   And the graduates going into public service roles are increasingly subsidized in some fashion by the law schools -- indeed, about a quarter of such jobs are supported by law school grants. [3]   This is a far cry from what was happening when I graduated from Columbia Law School in 1974.  At that time, it seemed like the vast majority of students exclusively sought employment in large law firms.  There were no clinical programs to speak of, let alone financial subsidies and loan forgiveness programs to support public interest work.  Those changes are very good ones -- very good for students, the legal profession and society.  I think we would all like to see these programs, and the opportunities that come with them, expand in the years to come.

My remarks tonight are inspired by the public service “silver lining” that is emerging in the current environment.  What I will talk about is the overarching public service obligation of lawyers and the opportunities and benefits that public service jobs provide.  As an initial matter, I believe that, as lawyers, we should broaden our perspective on our public service obligation and deepen our commitment to public service, irrespective of the particular job we currently hold.  More of us should consider careers in public service or at least aim to work in the public sector at various stages of our professional lives.  And, more broadly, we should view our public service obligation as a long-term, continuous responsibility that guides how we conduct ourselves – whether working in the public or private sectors.

I will begin, as lawyers often do, by defining some terms.  What do I mean, in the broadest sense, by the “public service obligation” of lawyers?  I will offer my view that the public service obligation is something that should permeate everything we do as lawyers.  Next, I will discuss some of the unique and significant benefits of public service.  And, finally, I will encourage you in the legal academy to continue teaching and emphasizing the importance of the lawyer’s public service obligation and its benefits, to raise the bar for lawyer performance and to inspire an interest in a broader set of career choices for your students.

A Lawyer’s Public Service Obligation

Law is a service business, with the emphasis on service. [4]   Our responsibilities as lawyers indeed center on our ethical obligations related to the services we provide to our clients, to the profession and to the rule of law.  And, as Ben Heineman, William Lee and David Wilkins recently wrote in their very thoughtful  piece on “Lawyers as Professionals and Citizens,” [5] there is a fourth ethical responsibility or dimension for lawyers that requires us to generally provide our services “in the public interest” in furtherance of a “safe, fair and just society.” [6]

To be sure, some lawyers have “pure” public service and public interest jobs, whether in government agencies, the military, the legal academy, public interest organizations, or non-profit work of various kinds.  In those positions, the duty of public service is the essence of the job description.  But this fourth ethical responsibility of public service for lawyers is by no means limited to those of us in public service roles.  It applies to all lawyers throughout their careers, including private sector lawyers advising private sector clients.  And it is an obligation that extends far beyond our still aspirational duty to provide 50 hours of pro bono legal services each year. [7]

As Roscoe Pound, the distinguished former Dean of Harvard Law School, so eloquently captured it, private sector lawyers also have an obligation to practice law “in the spirit of public service.” [8]   For me, that means that we are obligated to ask our clients the “should” or “ought to” questions and include those considerations in the advice we give.  Or, as Archibald Cox put it in terms we can all understand – lawyers should be willing to say to clients, “Yes, the law lets you do that, but don’t do it.  It’s a rotten thing to do.” [9]   Cox’s point is obviously that our role as lawyers transcends the technical -- it requires us to consider the public’s welfare in addition to the interests of a private client.  That is how it should be.

Perhaps if lawyers were better at fulfilling this aspect of our public service obligation, we could elevate our collective reputation, and finally make the list of most admired professions -- a list where teachers and members of our military always rightfully do well.  Lawyers, on the other hand, tend to trail way behind, sometimes barely ahead of telemarketers and lobbyists. [10]

But this was not always the case.  Lawyers, for example, played a central role in the founding of our nation and enshrining the values that guide our country today.  Thomas Jefferson was a lawyer, as was Abraham Lincoln. [11]   There are more modern day heroes too.  A number from my field, for example, have been singled out, including former SEC Chairman Manny Cohen – who rose from staff member to Chairman and brought about changes to allow SEC staff lawyers to provide pro bono legal services – and former Director of Corporation Finance, Linda Quinn, who was both a giant of the securities bar and the first woman to lead the Division. [12]   And there are, of course, other heroes from our ranks: Justices Thurgood Marshall, Sandra Day O’Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsberg.  Their careers, before they joined the Court, centered on championing the civil rights of minorities and women, as well as a commitment to legal education and other public service.

A 2013 survey by the Pew Research Center’s Religion and Public Life Project, however, paints a bleak picture of how our profession as a whole is regarded today.  It asked how much certain professions contribute to society’s well-being. [13]

Not surprisingly, 78% said members of the military contribute “a lot,” and 72% said teachers do as well.  Lawyers, on the other hand, got a disappointing 18% endorsement, with 34% of those surveyed saying that lawyers contribute very little or nothing to society. [14]   That 34% hurts.  Our image as a profession clearly needs work.

Public service though is about much more than image.  It is about lawyers being good citizens as well as knowledgeable, well-trained practitioners.  Personally, it has been one of the most satisfying aspects of my career, whether in the public or private sector.  And make no mistake, private practitioners, not just public sector lawyers, need to absorb and live the public service mandate in order to raise the bar on our real worth as a profession.  The “image part” will follow right behind.

Public Service Jobs

Government lawyers and public interest lawyers are also bound by the public service obligation, but for them it is their core mandate.  I used to say to the young prosecutors who worked for me when I was the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York: “your conscience is your client,” reminding them that, as representatives of the public, they should always, always take the “high road,” both substantively and procedurally, as they carry out their responsibilities.  The same applies to the SEC staff lawyers with whom I am now privileged to work.  The primary responsibility of government lawyers is to serve the public – and that is also their primary source of job satisfaction.  I see that every day with the SEC staff and the high levels of professional accomplishment and personal pride that comes from the work they do to protect investors, safeguard our markets, and facilitate capital formation -- the tripartite mission of the SEC.  Doing what you think is in the public’s best interest every day, and doing it in the most principled way, is a sure path to professional and personal fulfillment.  Very good work if you can get it.

The Rewards of Public Service

There are, of course, many other benefits and rewards that come from a public service job.  I will highlight just three of them:

• exposure to an important segment of our profession that contributes directly to the public welfare;
• hands-on training and greater responsibility as a young lawyer; and
• the opportunity to work on cutting edge issues.

When young lawyers ask me about a choice between a career in the public or private sector, I invariably offer the following advice -- if possible, try to spend time in both.  Even if you think you are destined to be a life-long government or public interest lawyer, or to have a long career in private practice in a large law firm, it is still invaluable to experience as many different slices of legal life as you can.

As young lawyers begin their legal careers, they often have very little idea of what will actually interest and engage them, so it is important to take advantage of every available opportunity early on.  Exploring both the public and private sectors will steepen and broaden their learning curves.  Our careers as lawyers typically span many decades, often as many as 40 or 50 years –that gives us a lot of time to work with.  So it is possible for your graduates, over the course of their careers, to seize any number of exciting and varied opportunities that come their way and ignite their interest.

This last piece of curbside advice is for the long-term too.  More senior – or as I like to say “seasoned” – lawyers should look for opportunities to follow their hearts and dreams, especially when they involve providing public service on a more full-time basis.  Both the lawyer and the public will be the beneficiaries.

At the SEC, for example, we have made an effort over the last several years to hire experts from the private sector, both lawyers and other market specialists.  Our existing staff and the new private sector recruits learn from and complement each other.  It unquestionably makes us a stronger agency and enhances our ability to protect investors and strengthen our capital markets.  We also benefit enormously from those academics, market experts and others with very busy day jobs who give of their time and talents to our advisory committees.  For example, in the coming days we will announce the members of the Market Structure Advisory Committee, a committee filled with market experts and academics that will assist our staff and the Commission in the very important work we are doing to comprehensively review the structure of our equity markets to optimize them for the benefit of investors and companies seeking to raise capital.  The opportunities are many.  Jobs in the government for lawyers range from short-term consultancies and fellowships, to full-time positions and even Presidential appointments, such as mine as Chair of the SEC and United States Attorney.

As a society, we need to attract talented, knowledgeable and genuinely committed professionals to public service and work to remove barriers that discourage giving back – whether the obstacles are financial, structural, educational or something else.

Of course, a major benefit of public service jobs for young lawyers is hands-on training and greater responsibility.  There simply is no substitute for “doing it” to grow your competence and expertise.  Trying a case, however small, is qualitatively different than serving as one of a dozen associates on the biggest antitrust or securities fraud case.  Having done both, I know that both can provide invaluable experience, but I would argue that young lawyers find the most vertical learning curves in the public sector -- where you can handle your own cases and where the decisional “buck” often stops with you.  Some of my most meaningful, and memorable, learning occurred when I was the one calling the shots as a young prosecutor.

Another significant benefit of public service jobs is the importance and variety of the work.  Prosecutors who worked for me when I was U.S. Attorney tried and convicted the terrorists who bombed the World Trade Center in 1993 and our embassies in East Africa in 1998, indicted Osama bin Laden, and investigated the terrorist attacks of 9/11.  Others indicted and convicted major financial institutions for securities and other frauds. [15]   Enforcement staff attorneys at the SEC root out fraudsters stealing millions of dollars in complex Ponzi schemes and recover money for harmed investors who count on their investments to fund their children’s education or their own retirements. [16]   Others at the agency develop policy initiatives that enhance the resiliency of our equity markets and provide more useful information to investors before they decide whether and where to invest their money.  In other areas of the public sector, lawyers work to overturn unjust laws, exonerate the innocent, uphold our civil rights, or provide legal services to those who cannot afford a lawyer.

Motivation is almost never lacking in public service jobs.  Indeed, the word that almost always pops up in discussing public service jobs is “fun” – a priority that has become far too elusive and scarce in our profession. [17]   The late Judge Edward Weinfeld of the Southern District of New York, who routinely arrived at the courthouse before 6 AM and worked twelve hour days, put it this way – “What one enjoys is not work.  It is joy.” [18]   I have been very fortunate in my career to share Judge Weinfeld’s view.  Finally, trying hard not to sound like I am on a soapbox, when you engage in public service, every day you go to work, you have a chance to make a real difference in people’s lives.  As I said earlier, very good work if you can get it.

So, thus far, I have urged that all lawyers recognize our obligation to conduct ourselves in furtherance of the public interest, whether directly from the perch of a public service job or by practicing law “in the spirit of public service” -- asking and advising on those “ought to” questions.  I have also made a shameless pitch for greater pursuit of public service jobs throughout our legal careers.  That brings me to my final point -- close to home for this audience -- how I believe law schools contribute so vitally to broadening law students’ perspectives and deepening their commitment to serving in the public interest.

Role of the Law Schools

Let me hasten to say that I would not presume to lecture you on legal education.  That is your expertise and one that I deeply respect.  Rather, I want to commend you for some of the steps law schools have taken to foster and promote public service and legal practice “in the spirit of public service.”  I will be brief and again mention just three:

• exposing students to opportunities and direct experience in public service;
• providing encouragement and support for placement in public service jobs; and
• teaching professional responsibility beyond specific courses as a permeating guiding principle.

Law schools today offer a wide range of clinical programs, externships, and other direct opportunities for students to obtain on-the-job public service experience through working in government agencies and public interest organizations.  I can tell you firsthand that the SEC has benefited greatly from these programs as we typically have law school interns from many different law schools working with us throughout the academic year -- last year, some 800 students from more than 130 law schools participated in the programs we offer.  Our interns provide a real contribution to our work, becoming valuable members of our teams – in enforcement, rulemaking and other areas of the agency’s responsibility.  Most of our interns receive school credit, and many have come back to work for us after graduation.

On top of providing such valuable direct experience while still in law school, law schools have also instituted several important, and often creative, programs to encourage and support their students’ placement in public service jobs.  These programs range from student loan deferral or forgiveness, fellowships and direct grants for a public service commitment after graduation to career fairs, symposiums, placement assistance, and public service mentorships.

More broadly, law schools have increasingly established centers focused on ethics and professional responsibility to prepare students for the difficult and important ethical issues they will invariably face during the course of their careers.  As typified by the Louis Stein Center for Law and Ethics at Fordham Law School, these programs go far beyond ensuring that the curriculum has a course or two on professional responsibility.  Rather, they teach what they call at Fordham “a life in noble lawyering.” [19]   These programs are a critically important component of a law school education that fosters a perspective that ethics and professional responsibility can and must serve as a life-long guiding principle.  It is a public service perspective that reminds students that our profession rightfully demands giving something back, which is important no matter where law school graduates end up spending their professional careers.

The benefits of this greater public service emphasis thus extends far beyond providing first-year jobs or a more diverse set of employment choices to law school graduates.  The enhanced focus will return real dividends in training a new generation of lawyers on the importance of public service in all of its forms and fostering the critical values of a public service ethic.  All of this will have a positive impact on how graduates practice and how the profession is perceived.

As you continue such efforts, it is important to keep in mind that a career in public service should not be a hard sell to many of the millennials who decide to attend law school.  There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that younger generations are generally more civic-minded and interested in community service than older -- by which I mean “my” and possibly your -- generations. [20]   There is also a trend of more law school graduates working in jobs that do not require passing the bar exam, including many in the public sector. [21]   And some foresee a growing demand for individuals with a law school education in the fields of health care, housing, elder care, international commerce and digital security. [22]  We should try to capitalize on all of these developments and opportunities as we think about the future of legal education.  Although easier said than done, surely it is possible to recalibrate our economic models for legal education to harness the new normal for lawyers, including, I hope, a greater emphasis on and participation in public service.

There is in my view, no higher calling for a lawyer than public service.  And each of you is actively engaged in perhaps the most important aspect of public service for our profession – teaching, guiding and inspiring our future lawyers.  You are the role models and primary drivers of how well lawyers will do in fulfilling their public service obligation.  How well they do at that, in turn, will heavily influence what kind of society we will have.  No pressure.

Just know how important you are and how important the decisions you make about legal education at the crossroads will be.  Most importantly, know how much the profession admires what you do and how grateful we are for the public service choice you have made for your own careers.

[1] Elizabeth Olson and David Segal, “A Steep Slide in Law School Enrollment Accelerates,” New York Times (December 17, 2014), available at http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/law-school-enrollment-falls-to-lowest-level-since-1987/?_r=1 .

[2] “American Bar Association Releases Class of 2013 Law Graduate Employment Data,” (April 9, 2014), available at http://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2014/04/american_bar_associa4.html .

[3] “Employment for the Class of 2013 – Selected Findings,” National Association for Law Placement (2014), available at http://www.nalp.org/uploads/Classof2013SelectedFindings.pdf .

[4] Many have written about the dichotomy that can be drawn between the “service” and “business” aspects of legal practice and legal competition.  As has been pointed out, the danger for the profession is that the balance can be struck too far on the business side.  While that is certainly a risk in the current environment, it must be avoided if we are to maintain and enhance the quality of legal services and our commitment to public service.   See, e.g., Ben W. Heineman, Jr., William F. Lee, and David B. Wilkins, “Lawyers as Professionals and as Citizens: Key Roles and Responsibilities in the 21st Century,” Harvard Law School Center on the Legal Profession (November 20, 2014), available at https://clp.law.harvard.edu/assets/Professionalism-Project-Essay_11.20.14.pdf .

[6] Id. at p.12.

[7] ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 6.1 (“A lawyer should aspire to render at least 50 hours of pro bono public legal services per year.”), available at http://www.americanbar.org/groups/probono_public_service/policy/aba_model_rule_6_1.html .

[8] Roscoe Pound, The Lawyer From Antiquity to Modern Times , West Publishing Company (1953).

[9] Reported in Gary Hengster, “News,” American Bar Association Journal (April 1989) as cited by Mary Ann Glendon. A Nation under Lawyers , Harvard University Press (1996).

[10] See, e.g., “Honesty/Ethics in Professions,” Gallup Poll (December 2013), available at http://www.gallup.com/poll/1654/honesty-ethics-professions.aspx .

[11] Dan Slater, “Barack Obama: the U.S.’s 44 th President (and 25 th Lawyer-President!),” Wall Street Journal Law Blog (November 5, 2008), available at http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/11/05/barack-obama-the-uss-44th-president-and-24th-lawyer-president/ .

[12] Kenneth M. Rosen, “Lessons On Lawyers, Democracy, and Professional Responsibility,” Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics (Winter 2006).

[13] “Public Esteem for Military Still High,” Pew Research Center Religion & Public Life Project (July 11, 2013), available at http://www.pewforum.org/2013/07/11/public-esteem-for-military-still-high/ .

[15] See, e.g., Peter Truell, “Daiwa Bank Admits Guilt In Cover-Up,” New York Times (February 29, 2009), available at http://www.nytimes.com/1996/02/29/business/daiwa-bank-admits-guilt-in-cover-up.html ; Reed Abelson, “Bankers Trust Is Ordered to Pay Fine,” New York Times (July 27, 1999), available at http://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/27/business/bankers-trust-is-ordered-to-pay-fine.html ; and Kenneth Gilpin, “Republic New York Pleads Guilty to Securities Fraud,” New York Times (December 18, 2001), available at http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/18/business/republic-new-york-pleads-guilty-to-securities-fraud.html .

[16] See SEC Spotlight on Enforcement Actions Against Ponzi Schemes, available at http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/enf-actions-ponzi.shtml .

[17] Philip G. Schrag, “Why Would Anyone Want to Be a Public Interest Lawyer?,” Georgetown Public Law Research Paper No. 10-52 (October 9, 2009), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1486246 .

[18] David Margolick, “A Lifetime of Law and Quiet Diligence for Judge Weinfeld,” New York Times (August 18, 1985), available at http://www.nytimes.com/1985/08/18/nyregion/a-lifetime-of-law-and-quiet-diligence-for-judge-weinfeld.html ; and Arnold Labasch, “Judge Edward Weinfeld, 86, Dies; On U.S. Bench Nearly 4 Decades,” New York Times (January 18, 1988), available at http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/18/obituaries/judge-edward-weinfeld-86-dies-on-us-bench-nearly-4-decades.html .

[19]   Steve Wilson, “The Work Ethic of Legal Ethics,” Fordham Lawyer Magazine (Spring 2013), available at http://www.flipdocs.com/showbook.aspx?ID=10005364_360503&p=18 .

[20] See Karen Sayre, “Civic generation rolls up sleeves in record numbers” USA Today (April 13, 2009); Connie Cass, “Young Generation No Slouches at Volunteering” AP (December 29, 2014), available at http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_AP_POLL_YOUNG_VOLUNTEERS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT .

[21] "Employment for the Class of 2013 - Selected Findings," (2014), available at http://www.nalp.org/uploads/Classof2013SelectedFindings.pdf .

[22] See Elizabeth Olson and David Segal, “A Steep Slide in Law School Enrollment Accelerates,” New York Times (December 17, 2014), available at http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/law-school-enrollment-falls-to-lowest-level-since-1987/?_r=1 .

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

About  Search

Joseph R. Biden

Proclamation 10749—public service recognition week, 2024.

By the President of the United States of America A Proclamation

Our Nation's over 20 million public servants work hard to deliver for our families, communities, and country. Their work matters to people's everyday lives: They keep neighborhoods safe and the buses running, and build futures for people in their hometowns. They are the lifeblood of our democracy, acting as brave first responders, election workers, and service members defending our country. This week, we recognize our Nation's public servants, who do the humble yet critical work of keeping our country running.

When I came into office, our country was facing an unprecedented crisis—a pandemic was raging and the economy was reeling. But we turned things around—in no small part because of our public servants. I signed the American Rescue Plan, providing $350 billion to ensure public servants could stay on the job. That money put more police officers in our communities and more teachers and education support professionals in our schools. It went directly to every community in America so public servants could decide how to best help their communities. Because of public servants' work, child care centers stayed open, families stayed in their homes, and small businesses stayed afloat. At the same time, this legislation also made one of the biggest investments ever in public safety. Our public servants have done an incredible job of putting these resources to work by hiring more officers for accountable, effective community policing and supporting violence intervention programs that help prevent crime in the first place. Together, we created new jobs, new businesses, and new hope for folks across the country.

Our Nation relies on our public servants every day, and they deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. That is why I issued an Executive Order to increase the minimum wage for Federal employees to $15 per hour, ensuring our public servants are paid fairly while also attracting more competitive applicants to these critical roles. I established a White House Task Force on Worker Organizing and Empowerment, led by Vice President Harris, to strengthen the right to organize and bargain collectively, including for Federal Government workers. Further, I launched a Government-wide initiative to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion in the Federal workforce so that it reflects all the communities we serve. My Administration finalized a rule prohibiting Federal agencies from considering an applicant's current or past pay when determining their future salaries—eliminating gender and racial pay inequities that can otherwise follow those seeking a job in public service. To ensure all Federal employees feel safe and supported in the workplace, I took executive action to protect Federal employees from discrimination on the basis of their gender identity or sexual orientation—pushing the Federal Government to become the model employer it can and should be.

My Administration has also taken significant action to provide student debt relief—giving our public servants some well-deserved breathing room. I fixed the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, which was designed to make sure public servants could get their student loans forgiven once they made payments for 10 years. When I took office, only 7,000 public servants had had their debts forgiven—it was past time to fix it. Thanks to my Administration's reforms, nearly 876,000 public servants have had their student debts forgiven.

We must do more to protect our Nation's public servants, who provide the expertise necessary for our democracy to function. To guarantee that career civil servants can continue to share their expertise and keep our democracy working, my Administration finalized a rule to protect the jobs of 2.2 million career civil servants—no matter who is in office.

Meanwhile, my Administration is working to empower and strengthen the career Federal workforce more than ever before. My Budget includes a focus on hiring more public servants into mission critical jobs, helping provide better services to the American people.

This week, I hope all the public servants feel proud. Across the country, we are seeing new shovels in the ground, people going to work, and families thriving. People are feeling pride in their hometowns and their country again and in knowing that we can get big things done when we work together. We are witnessing the greatest comeback our country has ever known—in no small part because of the hard work and dedication of our Nation's public servants.

Now, Therefore, I, Joseph R. Biden Jr., President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim May 5 through May 11, 2024, as Public Service Recognition Week. I call upon all Americans to celebrate public servants and their contributions this week and throughout the year.

In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this third day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-four, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-eighth.

NOTE: This proclamation was published in the Federal Register on May 13.

Joseph R. Biden, Proclamation 10749—Public Service Recognition Week, 2024 Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/371539

Filed Under

Simple search of our archives, report a typo.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

At Morehouse, Biden says dissent should be heard because democracy is 'still the way'

Stephen Fowler

Jeongyoon Han

President Biden speaks to graduating students at the Morehouse College commencement Sunday, May 19, 2024, in Atlanta. Alex Brandon/AP hide caption

President Biden speaks to graduating students at the Morehouse College commencement Sunday, May 19, 2024, in Atlanta.

President Joe Biden told Morehouse College's graduating class of 2024 that he's committed to serving Black voters while defending freedom and democracy in the face of "extremist forces" that he says threaten the soul of the nation.

With just six months until the general election, the speech, which was filled with religious themes of struggle and resilience, also served as a continuation of Biden's warning to his supporters of what he thinks the country would look like if Donald Trump is elected again.

"They don't see you in the future of America, but they're wrong," he said. "To me, we make history, not erase it. We know Black history is American history."

Graduating students at the Morehouse College commencement bow their heads Sunday, May 19, 2024, in Atlanta. President Biden addressed the graduating class of 2024 and warned about "extremist forces" he says threaten the soul of the nation. Alex Brandon/AP hide caption

Graduating students at the Morehouse College commencement bow their heads Sunday, May 19, 2024, in Atlanta. President Biden addressed the graduating class of 2024 and warned about "extremist forces" he says threaten the soul of the nation.

The president's commencement address at Morehouse, a historically Black school in Atlanta, also comes as polling shows potentially lower support for his reelection efforts among Black voters and young voters, and as campus protests over conflict in Gaza have disrupted graduations around the country.

Biden said he understood angst over the direction of the country, acknowledged "dissent about America's role in the world" and said that those who have different views should have their voices heard in the name of democracy.

"That's my commitment to you," he said. "To show you: democracy, democracy democracy — it's still the way."

Biden will cap off a week of outreach to Black Americans with Morehouse commencement

Biden is set for the Morehouse graduation. Students are divided

His speech is also one of many events on his recent trip aimed at speaking to Black voters, following events with plaintiffs in the historic Brown v. Board Supreme Court case, meetings with Black Greek Letter Organizations, often known as the Divine Nine, and before he headlines an NAACP dinner in Detroit, Mich.

For weeks, several college and university campuses around the country have been roiled with student protests and encampments expressing opposition against Biden and U.S. policies and involvement around conflict in Gaza.

Morehouse has seen student demonstrations, but not occupation of campus spaces or clashes with law enforcement. Outside of the ceremony, a small number of protestors gathered while the commencement itself did not see any major disruptions.

Biden will deliver the commencement address at Morehouse College

Last week, Morehouse College President David Thomas said he would rather halt proceedings than have students escorted away for protesting.

"If my choice is 20 people being arrested on national TV on the Morehouse campus, taken away in zip ties during our commencement, before we would reach that point, I would conclude the ceremony," he said on NPR's Weekend Edition .

An attendee stands in protest with their back to President Biden as Biden speaks to graduating students at the Morehouse College commencement Sunday in Atlanta. John Bazemore/AP hide caption

An attendee stands in protest with their back to President Biden as Biden speaks to graduating students at the Morehouse College commencement Sunday in Atlanta.

Those concerns did not come to pass. Apart from the heightened security and increased media presence, Biden's speech was met with a similar response to a typical college graduation ceremony.

More than 400 graduating students walked across the stage Sunday, and during Biden's speech a handful of students, some wearing keffiyehs , turned their chairs around to face away from the president. After the ceremony, Morehouse issued a statement praising the graduating class and their intentionally muted response to Biden.

"It is fitting that a moment of organized, peaceful activism would occur on our campus while the world is watching to continue a critical conversation," the statement reads. "We are proud of the resilient class of 2024's unity in silent protest, showing their intentionality in strategy, communication, and coordination as a 414-person unit."

DeAngelo Fletcher, Morehouse College's valedictorian, closed his address to his classmates by addressing global conflict, particularly the Israel-Hamas war.

"For the first time in our lives, we've heard the global community sing one harmonious song that transcends language and culture," he said. "It is my sense as a Morehouse Man, nay – as a human being – to call for an immediate and a permanent ceasefire in the Gaza Strip."

Biden's speech at Morehouse comes with intense scrutiny as many presidential horse race polls show the president lagging with young voters, Black voters and other nonwhite groups that helped propel him to a narrow victory against Donald Trump in 2020.

Those polls — for now — signal a drop in support for Biden but not necessarily an equal shift towards Donald Trump. There are also signs that some of the displeasure with Biden is more pronounced among people who aren't as likely to vote in November.

While facing a nominal challenge in the Democratic presidential primary, Biden's best-performing areas have often come in places with a large share of Black voters. For example, in Georgia's primary contest 95% of Black voters pulled a Democratic ballot, and Biden won 95% of the overall vote.

While some students, faculty and alumni expressed opposition to Biden's selection as the commencement speaker, reaction on campus during the graduation ceremony was largely positive.

Dr. Tiffany Johnson, a 50-year-old who came to the campus green at 4:30 a.m. to see her son graduate, was also excited to see Biden.

"He is the leader of the free world, the most important job in the world, and for him to come to speak to [Morehouse] graduates, to inspire them, is phenomenal," Johnson said.

Johnson said Black voters who might not support Biden are part of a "bandwagon" that do not understand what he has done for the community, and said his speech would be an ideal opportunity to share his accomplishments.

In the speech, Biden touted a track record that he says makes key investments in Black communities, including a record $16 billion funding package towards historically Black colleges and universities, protecting voting rights, and creating economic policies that strengthens Black businesses.

• commencement address
• graduation ceremony
• morehouse college
• young voters
• Donald Trump
• black voters

Federal Budget 2024: Opposition Leader Peter Dutton gives the Coalition's budget reply — as it happened

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has issued his budget reply speech, following an eventful day in the House of Representatives.

Take a look back at how Thursday's events unfolded.

• 11:45 AM 11:45 AM Thu 16 May 2024 at 11:45am That's all for today's budget live blog
• 10:41 AM 10:41 AM Thu 16 May 2024 at 10:41am Ferguson, Dutton clash over international students' housing
• 10:21 AM 10:21 AM Thu 16 May 2024 at 10:21am A budget reply long on populism, short on detail

Live updates

That's all for today's budget live blog.

By Andrew Thorpe

Thanks for joining us for day 3 of our live budget coverage — it's always a pleasure reading your comments as we bring you the latest.

Let's take a look back at what happened today in federal politics:

• Anthony Albanese's tenant says he was blindsided by eviction notice
• Labor and the Greens strike a deal to pass fuel-efficiency standards
• PM labels WA senator's use of a pro-Palestinian chant "not appropriate"
• Archibald-winning artist releases statement on Gina Rinehart/National Portrait Gallery controversy
• Peter Dutton proposes slash to permanent migration program and international student numbers in budget reply

You can catch up on all those developments and more below, or   download the   ABC News app   and   subscribe to our range of news alerts   for the latest news.

And if you want to read our full wrap of the budget reply speech, political reporter Tom Crowley has the story below:

Why do we even have a budget reply speech?

Can you please explain why the Coalition is replying to the budget? I thought that the budget Labor released was final and is what would be implemented - M

Thanks for the question, M.

You're right in the sense that the budget reply itself is purely political — it's an opportunity for the opposition to flag what it would do differently, rather than an announcement of what's to come.

I would point out, though, that even the budget itself is not final - consider it the government's proposal for the year ahead.

The spending contained in the budget still needs to pass the parliament (hence the flurry of negotiations in the days following the treasurer's speech), and unless the government controls both houses, that means there is often some degree of compromise involved.

If the government hits a hard roadblock and can't pass its budget bills through the parliament, that's when things start to get a little dicey .

Chris Bowen with a novel solution to the housing crisis

Dutton says he would axe public servant roles to save money.

The opposition leader tells Ferguson he could save billions from the budget bottom line by cutting public servant jobs.

"The government's employed 36,000 more public servants in Canberra at a cost of $24 billion over four years," he says. "The entire defence force is made up of 58,000 men and women."

It's worth pointing out that in the final year of the Morrison government, the public service was revealed to have spent $20.8 billion on external contractors and consultants .

Ferguson, Dutton clash over international students' housing

Staying with 7.30, host Sarah Ferguson has pulled up the opposition leader, who's appearing in studio, on his rhetoric linking the rental crisis to international student numbers.

After Dutton calls out the University of Sydney for its high percentage of international students, calling it "untenable", Ferguson points to figures showing international students account for more than half of Australia's economic growth — and only 4 per cent of them are in the rental market.

"Really? Where are they living, Sarah?" Dutton replies.

The two go on to clash over the reliability of the figures, with Dutton citing the fact that people are "40 and 50 deep at the moment lining up for a rental property" as sufficient evidence that international students are a key part of the problem.

Dutton leant on 'hot button issues', says Tingle

Here's 7.30's chief political correspondent Laura Tingle with her analysis of the budget reply:

A budget reply long on populism, short on detail

That's it for Peter Dutton's budget reply speech.

It included some new policy announcements — notably cuts to migration levels and the proposed introduction of a number of new online offences — but there certainly wasn't the level of detail we've seen from some replies in the past.

The focus on migration, in particular, gives us a good indication of what kind of election campaign we have in store for the year ahead of us.

Dutton worried by 'criminal dark underbelly of the internet'

The opposition leader is discussing anti-Semitism on university campuses, before pivoting to online extremism — and the internet more broadly.

"There's been an uptick in young Australians committing crimes where they're filming and uploading their crimes to social media. A Coalition government will make it an offence to post criminal acts online ," Dutton says. "Those convicted will be banned from using digital platforms and liable for up to two years' imprisonment. "As a father of three children who all grew up in the digital age, I'm troubled by the material our children are exposed to."

He also promises to introduce a new criminal offence for coercive behaviour online , including threatening a partner or family member or tracking them using spyware.

Coalition wants uniform knife laws across states and territories

The opposition leader is now recalling his time as a Queensland police officer.

"As a former police officer the horrific scenes of beaten women and distraught children I've encountered stay with me to this day, as do the memories of taking women shaking with fear to shelters and safe homes and helping them relocate with their children to safety," he says.

He says the Coalition will work with states and territories to develop uniform knife laws across the nation , giving police power to stop and search people using detector wands, as well as restricting the sale and possession of knives by "dangerous individuals".

Here are the housing, migration policies we expected

Dutton is announcing a number of policies related to migration that he's tying to the housing crisis.

"Tonight, I announce several measures a Coalition will government will implement to meet housing prices head-on by alleviating pressure on the housing market," he says. "We believe that by rebalancing the migration program and taking decisive action on the housing crisis, the Coalition can free up almost 40,000 additional homes in the first year, and well over 100,000 homes in the first five years. "First, we will implement a two-year ban on foreign investors and temporary residents purchasing existing homes in Australia. "Secondly, we will reduce the permanent migration program by 25% from 185,000 to 140,000 for the first two years , in recognition of the urgency of the crisis ... Similarly, we will return the refugee and humanitarian program planning to 13,750 , closer to the longer-term average. "Third, we will reduce excessive numbers of foreign students studying at metropolitan universities, to relieve stress on rental markets in our major cities."

More Coalition praise for nuclear power

Labor has been calling on Peter Dutton to add more detail to the Coalition's recent embrace of nuclear power, and while it looks like that might not happen tonight, the opposition leader is definitely laying on the rhetoric.

"We hold the largest deposits of uranium on the planet. You have to ask yourself the question, does the prime minister and minister Chris Bowen have it right, or is the rest of the developed world that just doesn't know what they're talking about?" Dutton says. "The government have ordered nuclear-powered submarines so it raises the reasonable question: why is the technology safe for our submariners but unsafe for our citizens?"

Dutton promises to defund Environmental Defender's Office

The opposition leader is now attacking what he regularly refers to as the government's "renewables-only" energy policy.

"For all of the government's talk about a future made in Australia, their current approach has no chance if energy isn't cheap and consistent and comparable to other competitor nations," he says. "Renewables have a role to play in our energy system, of course they do. But we can't rely on weather-dependent energy alone. "We need power 24/7, especially for our hospitals, for our factories and freezers, that need to operate around-the-clock."

He goes on to promise the Coalition would "unlock gas in key basins like the Beetaloo" and defund the Environmental Defender's office.

Dutton lays out a 'back to basics' economic approach

Dutton is laying out five tenets of "back to basics" economic management he says the Coalition will restore if it is returned to government.

They include:

• reining in inflationary spending — "We will not spend $13.7 billion on corporate welfare for green hydrogen and critical minerals";
• removing regulatory roadblocks;
• reducing the "hostility" of Labor's industrial relations regime (for example, reverting to the old definition of a casual worker);
• lowering taxes;
• and reforming competition policy.

Electric vehicles make an early appearance

Dutton begins his speech with a focus on cost-of-living issues, zeroing in on rent hikes and then vehicle prices more specifically.

"The government is trying to force you into buying an electric vehicle ... if you choose to buy a vehicle that is not a hybrid, or is not a diesel, that is your choice, and it should be restored," he says.

He's referring to the government's fuel-efficiency standards, which the Greens agreed to back today.

Peter Dutton begins his budget reply speech

The opposition leader is at the dispatch box to deliver his speech.

Watch live here:

Did Gina Rinehart ask the National Portrait Gallery to remove an unflattering portrait?

Stay tuned for the budget reply — but you should know that down the road from Parliament House at the National Portrait Gallery, there's a different controversy brewing.

Read the full story below :

What could we see in Dutton's budget reply speech?

We're about 15 minutes from the opposition leader's budget reply speech — so let's take a look at what it might contain.

Peter Dutton's first question to the PM in Question Time the day after the budget — a good indicator of where an opposition perceives the government to be weak — was nominally about housing, but also made sure to reference migration levels.

Expect the opposition leader to make policy announcements in both of those areas.

If he believes he can link the housing crisis to boat arrivals in the public's mind — via the government's handle on border control more generally — don't expect him to shy away from doing so.

When it comes to cost-of-living issues, Dutton has already flagged that the opposition will support the $300 energy bill relief package, as well as the freeze on PBS medicine prices.

I suspect we'll see further announcements in that area, as the Coalition won't be keen to cede that ground to the government.

Analysis: Why the power rebate has been called more ‘stunt’ than value for taxpayers' money

By Lara Smit

In the context of a federal budget that will be worth almost $730 billion next year, $3.5 billion might seem like a drop in the ocean, writes energy reporter Daniel Mercer .

And, sure, it'll amount to less than half of one per cent of budgeted spending in 2024-25.

But in the context of an energy transition that's already racked up quite a few bills, and which is set to cost much more, Bruce Mountain reckons it's money that could have been put to better use.

"In a sense, this is a golden opportunity to encourage the transition for both cleaner energy and storage," says Professor Mountain, the director of the Victoria Energy Policy Centre.

"But it's not being taken [so the government can get] a political dividend for … being seen to hand out money."

Read the full analysis by Daniel Mercer below:

Psychiatry shortages could hamper mental health initiatives

By Tessa Fleming

The peak body for Australian psychiatrists says workplace shortages could hamper the budget's pledge to establish dozens of new Medicare mental health centres.

The government announced almost $30 million for 61 centres that'll offer free mental health support through a team of on-call psychiatrists, psychologists, and GPs.

At least 30 of these centres will be located in regional and rural areas.

But the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP) president Dr Elizabeth Moore says there isn't enough staff to accommodate the promise.  

"It's great that the government did that and committed to that, but you need a psychiatry workforce to man it," she told ABC Radio Melbourne. "So our concern is that if you don't invest in building the workforce you won't be able to provide those services."

She said the sector cannot "wait any longer".

"Without this investment, Australians will continue to miss out on life saving and essential mental health care and treatment."

Investment towards stopping violent men left out of budget's DV package, says advocate

Women's safety advocates say money allocated in Tuesday's budget for domestic violence services will do little to break the cycle of men's violence against women and children.

Labor allocated almost $4 million for anti-violence measures.   But Phillip Ripper from the "No To Violence" campaign says not enough money is being directed towards preventative programs.

"We did expect to see a significant investment in frontline service working with men who use violence as well as women escaping violence and that's what we were sadly lacking," he told ABC Radio National.

Mobile Menu Overlay

The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500

Remarks by President   Biden at the National Peace Officers Memorial   Service

U.S. Capitol Washington, D.C.

12:21 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:  President Yoes, Auxiliary President Hennie, Auxiliary President Lehmann, Executive Director and good friend Jimmy Pasco, thank you for your service to our nation and for inviting me to join you once again today. I’d also like to thank the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General Monaco and — as well the deputy of — the Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas; and the Director of the FBI; Secret Service; Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms; the U.S. Marshals Service; and the U.S. Capitol Police for their leadership. We’re also joined by my good friend, Wade Carpenter, president of the Chiefs of Police, and Ed Kelly, president of the firefighters’ union.  And thank you, members of the Congress who are here today. Two weeks ago, I was in Charlotte, North Carolina, to spend some time with the families of the eight brave police officers who were shot in the line of duty.  Tragically, four of them were killed.  They were husbands, fathers, heroes. And all of you who serve and for your families left behind, you live a cho- — a simple truth: Every time you put on that shield and walk out of the house, your family wonders if that call will come or if they’ll get that terrible call somewhere during the day or night.  We owe you as a nation. This year, we honor ov- — over 200 heroic women and men from all across the law enforcement community who made the ultimate sacrifice. For all the families of our fallen officers, I know hearing the name of your husband, wife, father, mother, son or daughter, brother or sister brings it all back as if you got that news just 10 minutes ago.  That black hole in the middle of your chest — you feel like you’re being sucked into.  It’s like losing part of your soul. I know.  When my son Beau spent a year in Iraq, he came home with stage four glioblastoma and was going to die, and he did.  I know what it’s like.  I get a feeling that you all know, as well, who have lost in the past.  You know, I found out there is only one thing — at least for me, when my — got the call that my wife and daughter were dead; when I got the call my son was about to die — I know the only one thing that helped: family.  If you have family, hold them tight.  Hold on to each other, because the day will come — it’s hard to believe — when the thought of your husband or your wife or your son or your daughter will bring a smile to your lips before it brings a tear to your eye.  It takes a long time, but it will come.  My wish for you: It’ll come sooner than later. There is a line from the English poet John Milton.  He said, “They also serve who only stand and wait.”  Every family of an officer stands and waits so their loved one can serve the rest of us. I admire your courage in being here.  And I hope you take comfort in the knowledge that their sacrifice will never be forgotten and then, in this extended family of women and men assembled here today, who will always be there for you — other police officers, they’ll always be there for you. Throughout my career, I’ve unfortunately spoken at too many funerals of too many police officers — extraordinary, brave, heroic public servants who kept us safe.  Being a police officer is not just what you do; it’s who you are. You’re just like all the women and men in law enforcement I grew up with in Scranton and Claymont, Delaware.  You always run toward danger as others run away from it.  Most of you, even when you were kids, you did it, long before you became an officer.  You run toward the cries for help knowing that you could be of help.  It’s part of your DNA to serve, to protect, to defend. You represent the very best of America.  You’re the steel spine of this country. Back in February, I convened a group of police chiefs at the White House to talk about the hard work you’re doing to make our communities safer. Being a cop is one hell of a lot harder than it’s ever been.  We expect everything of you.  We expect everyone — drug counselors, you’re supposed to be, protecting people who are overdosing; social workers to kids who have been abandoned; guardians in communities flooded with weapons of fear. That’s why, since day one of my presidency, I’ve been working to make sure you have the tools you need to protect, the partners you need, and the community to help.  During the pandemic, I signed the American Rescue Plan that provided $350 billion to states and cities that they could use to keep communities safe, retain and hire more police officers, pay overtime and bonuses, expand benefits for disabled first responders, and support violent [violence] prevention strategies. Places like Detroit, Toledo, Kansas City, Houston put more cops on the beat.  It was one of the largest federal investments ever made in public safety. I also signed the most sweeping gun safety law in nearly 30 years to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous individuals, while strengthening background checks and — for gun purchases, cracking down on illegal gun sales, reining in “ghost guns” that are increasingly found at crime scenes. My Safer America Plan invests $37 billion in public safety to hire many more police officers trained in community policing, to build trust, to solve crimes faster. I’m grateful for the partnership of Jim and the other law enforcement officers that we worked together on my executive order on policing. My Safer America Plan also makes investments to support programs that are proven to tackle the root causes of crime, to ensure you have the psychologists and the social workers responding to crises alongside you. We also know that police officers deal with unbelievable stress.  Every time you respond to a call, execute a warrant, or conduct a traffic spot [stop], there’s a tremendous risk: fear of ambush, anxiety of not knowing what’s behind that door, the trauma of bearing witness to the most horrible tragedies imaginable. That’s why our administration is laser-focused on providing you with the mental health and wellness resources you need and deserve. That’s why I also signed extended benefits for families of officers who tragically died by suicide — honoring Capitol Police officers like Howard Liebengood, who defended the Capitol on January 6th, whose dad I knew well when he served as Sergeant at Arms in the United States Senate. We remember all our law enforcements who defend this Capitol and our democracy on that terrible day. And Congress should also pass the Honoring Fallen Heroes Act that extends benefits to first responders who are exposed to toxic substances and die of cancer. I know so many of you still carry the physical and invisible wounds of your service.  We can never thank you enough for your courage, your service, and your sacrifice. You risk your lives every day for the safety of the people you don’t even know.  That’s why each of you, each and every one of you, is a hero. It’s no accident that violent crime is near a record 50-year low — a 50-year low.  It’s because of extraordinary efforts by all of you in your communities, together with historic steps taken to support you — to stop the flow of illegal guns, to hold gun traffickers accountable for crimes. It matters, and it matters a lot. I often say: There is no greater responsibility of government than ensuring the safety of the American people and those who sacrifice to protect us all. We’ve made a lot of progress, but there’s still much more to be done. Let me close.  To the families here today, my wife and I know how hard it is in different ways, but I promise you the day will come again when the memory of your loved one will bring a smile to your lips before it brings a tear to your eye.  It may take a couple seasons, but it will come. And I hope you always remember one thing that is never fully lost: your love for them and their love for you. God bless you all.  May God protect law enforcement.  And may God protect our troops.  (Applause.) 12:30 P.M. EDT

Stay Connected

We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better.

Opt in to send and receive text messages from President Biden.