The Tribune

By KEILE CAMPBELL

Tribune Staff Reporter

kcampbell@tribunemedia.net

FORMER Public Service Minister Brensil Rolle is calling for disciplinary action against Permanent Secretary Melvin Seymour after he was photographed last week in Progressive Liberal Party paraphernalia, warning that failing to act would make the rules governing political activity unenforceable and expose the government to challenges from public officers previously disciplined under those same rules.

Mr Rolle said the issue is not simply one of optics but of enforcement, insisting the government cannot apply General Orders selectively without collapsing the system used to regulate public officers.

Mr Seymour, the permanent secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, declined to comment on the matter on Monday, as did Minister Fred Mitchell.

Photos showing Mr Seymour in PLP paraphernalia on Nomination Day surprised many observers, who view the rules governing such conduct as strict and clear-cut.

As recently as February 2, Gina Thompson, the permanent secretary in the Ministry of Labour and Public Services, even issued a circular to senior civil servants on political activity by public officers, drawing attention to General Order 949, which speaks to the involvement of public officers in political activities.

Entitled POLITICAL ACTIVITIES OF PUBLIC OFFICERS, she warned: “The character of any public service depends entirely on its loyalty, integrity, ability and impartiality. It follows therefore that public officers should maintain a code of reserve in all political matters and that the public airing of an officer’s own political views may destroy that impartiality which any Government may expect of its own public service. To ensure, therefore, that standards are upheld, it may be necessary in a case of seriouys indiscretion, to consider action against the public officer concerned.”

Yesterday, Mr Rolle said he was extremely disappointed.

“While I believe permanent secretaries have a right to their own political persuasion, as long as they’re holding that post as permanent secretary, they cannot violate any aspect of general order and any clear violation of general orders by a permanent secretary, like any other public officer, that person must be disciplined,” he said.

“Going forward, any public officer who participates in any political event cannot be disciplined until Mr Melvin Seymour is disciplined. And furthermore, if any public officer was disciplined because of political activity while Melvin Seymour was not disciplined, they have a right, in my opinion, to sue the government to receive justice because it cannot be justice for some and injustice for everybody else.”

According to sources, someone in Mr Seymour’s position would be on a wage of around $104k, with a $20k ‘responsibility allowance,’ a $12k housing allowance, plus full pension - as he had previously retired - and car allowance.

Observers point to General Order 949, which requires public officers to maintain political neutrality through a “code of reserve”, even though it does not prohibit membership in a political party.

Mr Rolle said the disciplinary process would typically begin with a show-cause letter requiring the officer to explain why disciplinary action should not be taken.

The controversy has been sharpened by the experience of foreign affairs officer Ivan Thompson, who wrote on Facebook that he was warned in a May 2024 letter — signed by Mr Seymour — against engaging in political activity because he was contravening General Order 949.

After images of Mr Seymour surfaced, Mr Thompson publicly shared the letter alongside a photograph of the permanent secretary in PLP paraphernalia, questioning the consistency of enforcement. In a post of Facebook, Mr Thompson said: “Imagine being called in by your PS, getting a serious tongue lashing, not giving you any opportunity to respond, then issuing you this said letter. Then today, this picture comes across your phone by the very person demonizing you of the very thing!”

“It is crazy,” Mr Thompson said yesterday. “When you consider that the Permanent Secretary runs the ministry — the minister is not responsible for the ministry — the highest official in any government ministry is the permanent secretary, and when you see the highest official in the ministry doing that, you know we have some serious problems.”

According to attorney Hilbert Collie, who represents Mr Thompson, the matter raises concerns about whether established procedures and terms of employment are being applied evenly.