Patronage Politics and GLCs Reform in Sabah

I would like to frame my talk within the concept of patronage politics that is so pervasive and continue to dominate Sabah politics.

My talk today is a work in progress on patronage politics in Sabah. So most of the things that I'll share today are not new and are based on the work of Regina Lim ("Federal-State Relations in Sabah: The Berjaya Administration, 1976-85") and David Brown ("Why Governments Fail to Capture the Economic Rent: the Unofficial Appropriation of Rain Forest Rent in Insular Southeast Asia Between 1970 and 1999"). 

More studies have to be done in order to understand the changing and evolving relationship between politicians and businessmen under patronage politics. 

Patronage politics is a practice where powerful people obtain and maintain political support through the award of all kinds of 'gifts' either in the form of money, position and development aid to their supporters. Politicians resort to patronage politics to keep their network of supporters intact and to build more networks.

On the surface, patronage politics seems to be a very straightforward phenomenon but what makes it fascinating and complicated is the network that describes the relationship between politicians and businessmen and the economic entities under their control. 

Historical Origin

Patronage politics is not a recent phenomenon. It has its roots during the colonial times. The British, for instance, gave timber licences to the USNO and UPKO leaders to fund their political activities. They awarded timber concessionaire to their supporters. 

Patronage politics continued even after the successive parties took over, for instance, under the Berjaya Government, timber licenses were given to Berjaya supporters according to the “ABC System” - A for leaders or followers, B for businessmen and C for community leaders, native chiefs and village headmen (Lim 2008).

The Berjaya Government also established many cooperatives through Koperasi BERJAYA Bhd or KOBERSA, which apart from providing jobs and generating incomes through small-medium business activities, were also used to induce people to join the party (Lim 2008).

After defeating the Berjaya Government, the new government under PBS vowed to cut political leaders’ ties with timber business but as it turned out many could not resist the temptation of using timber money to buy political support (Brown 2001).

Some were alleged to have stashed money obtained from timber profits somewhere in Hong Kong  and distributed timber concessions to their relatives (Brown 2001). Even though the number of timber concessions was relatively smaller compared to the size of timber concessions distributed during the USNO and Berjaya rule, PBS was equally responsible for deepening the politics of patronage using timber resources.

Under Sabah UMNO, timber concessions continued to be given to political supporters (Brown 2001). In fact, in order to ensure the downfall of PBS in 1994, two companies - Crocker Range Timur and Peluamas - were said to be instructed to buy over PBS leaders to jump to BN (Brown 2001). In return, Crocker Range Timur and Peluamas were awarded with vast timber concessions (Brown 2001).

A serious allegation came when a Chinese businessman - alleged to be  “runner” for a very influential UMNO leader was arrested in Hong Kong with Ringgit Malaysia 16 million in cash. Upon interrogation by the Hong Kong authorities, the businessman alleged that the money belonged to the UMNO leader to be used to fund political campaigns in Sabah. The UMNO leader had denied the allegation.

Prospects for Reform

Having shared with you the pervasiveness of patronage politics in Sabah, where do we go from here? And what are the prospects for reform?

Let me start by saying that this is the opportune time for us to make things right. We do not need a radical change like the American Revolution or the Russian Revolution. What we need is a structural change in our system. 

The new government at the state and federal level used the agenda for reform as their key campaign message. Even though lately there has been so much of unhappiness about the government not fulfilling its promises, I am giving the government the benefit of the doubt and I am confident that they will be bold enough to start the reform now.

I am optimistic because the young leaders from the ruling party and the opposition have spoken against patronage politics. Syed Saddiq, the young leader of Bersatu, had warned his party members against seeking contracts and positions. Some in his party didn't like what he said but his concerns were echoed by another young leader from Sabah UMNO Naim Moktar who said that "it is time to stop this political madness that aims only for monetary gain - there is no point in shouting "new Malaysia" if the essence is still the same as before".

The Warisan-led government is also taking the right step by stopping the practice of appointing politicians to head the GLCs.

We need to keep the momentum going so that this agenda for reform continue - and that more and more people will be educated about the problems in our system and the need to fix it urgently. But this has to be institutionalised. We need to introduce rules and regulations so that the system is not abused by politicians for their own gain. 

In Sabah, the practice of jumping from one party to another is legendary but we cannot blame the YBs for shifting their political allegiance. It is the system that encourages our YBs to jump from one party to another. We are told by the YBs that the reason for them to jump is because they can better serve their constituents under the ruling government. We also often hear people from the ruling government insisting that they won't give development assistance to areas controlled by the opposition.

This will not happen when we are in an inclusive political system where economic opportunities are distributed equitably according to the needs of society. This is something that the new government must address.

Many of us in Sabah believe that we can become like Singapore if we are independent or given more autonomy to run our own affairs. But unlike Sabah, Singapore promotes and practices good governance. Singapore's political institutions are inclusive. 

Our system is not defective but ineffective. Our political institutions are extractive in which our economic wealth is controlled by the select few through patronage politics. That's the reason why despite our natural wealth, our growth is low, our unemployment rate is high, and we have been consistently ranked as one of the poorest states in Malaysia.

So whatever reform we will do next, our target must be on making our institutions more inclusive and changing the system. If this is not done, even if a new government comes in, the new people will be prone to abuse the system for their political gain - and things will be much worst if the same people are elected and allowed to run the same old system. 

Thank you

*Based on talk on GLC Reform organised by the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) Sabah, March 25, 2019. 

Kimanis By-Election: A Do or Die Mission for Warisan and UMNO

Arnold Puyok & Asri Salleh

On 18 January 2020, the people in Kimanis will once again go to the polls. The more than 29,000 voters will decide whether it is Warisan/PH or UMNO/BN.

This is not an ordinary by-election. It is arguably the by-election of all the by-elections since GE14.

It is a litmus test for both Warisan and UMNO. Warisan’s performance in the by-election is a reflection of its popularity. The by-election will gauge the people’s feelings and support towards the PH-Warisan-UPKO-led government. If Warisan wins, it will give Chief Minister Shafie Apdal a major boost to lead Sabah until GE15. If Shafie can end the BN’s winning streak, he will have the leverage to strengthen Warisan’s control over local politics. UMNO needs to win this by-election too. Its victory will open the possibility for the party to reemerge as a strong alternative to the PH-Warisan-UPKO coalition. Sabah UMNO particularly has to prove that it is still a relevant party in Sabah. The Kimanis by-election is a golden opportunity for UMNO to discard the perception that it is a party stuck in a time warp.

As the by-election is a do or die mission for both parties, choosing the “right” candidate is crucial. Warisan has chosen to field Karim Bujang, a former UMNO stalwart and state assemblyman for Bongawan while UMNO has fielded Mohamad Alamin, the Kimanis UMNO divisional head. Both are no strangers to Kimanis voters. Both have their own strengths and weaknesses. The voters know their track record and background very well.

The issues in the by-election vary from local issues such as infrastructures to the PSS (Pass Sementara Sabah) or Sabah Temporary Pass. BN has so far campaigned heavily against the PSS, persuading the voters to reject Warisan as the PSS is akin to allowing illegals to stay in Sabah for good and a stepping stone for them to apply for citizenship. The narrative revolves around the slogan, "one vote for Warisan is a vote for the PSS”. Joining the BN in attacking the Warisan are members of the Gabungan Bersatu Sabah (GBS) - PBS, STAR and SAPP. This is an interesting partnership - one without a structured platform but a common issue as a basis for a strategic cooperation.

No matter how hard Warisan is trying to allay public fears over the PSS, the sentiment is that a substantial number of Sabahans are not convinced that it is an effective strategy to solve the problems of illegals in Sabah. It appears that people have more doubts now despite the explanation by Warisan leaders. The PSS could be one of the potent issues that could tip the balance of power in BN’s favour in Kimanis and beyond if it is not handled well by Warisan.

The PSS is like MA63. It has become a polemic as well as an emotive issue that can be easily exploited to win votes. Warisan is taking a huge risk in introducing the PSS as its effectiveness can only be seen when it is fully implemented. Thus without an effective communication strategy and a long-term plan to address the issue of illegals, the PSS will continue to be Warisan’s weak point.

'Development' is still a popular issue. Warisan campaigners urge the voters to vote for Warisan for the sake of development (the same strategy used by BN before). However, development as an issue is hard to sell nowadays especially if is it sold by those who failed to deliver when they were in power but now seeking to be reelected.

In Kimanis, ethnic factor plays a role too. But it is not always as straightforward as in Peninsular Malaysia. Ethnicity is often overshadowed by regional sentiment, cultural and religious similarities and family ties. So, how the Brunei Malay, the Kadazandusun and the Chinese voters vote will not solely be determined by ethno-religious sentiment alone.

It looks like Warisan has the advantage given that it controls access to state resources and machinery. But as GE14 shows, patronage politics and a well-oiled campaign machinery are no longer effective weapons to galvanise support. Sabahans have the habit of punishing their leaders at the polls. It is not impossible for the Kimanis voters to go against the tide.

Whatever the outcomes of the by-election are, the state government will still remain under the PH-Warisan-UPKO coalition. But the Kimanis by-election is enough to measure the feelings of the electorates towards the performance of the government of the day and its elected leaders.

MA63, “Equal Partnership” and the Future of the Malaysian Federation

Arnold Puyok

MA63 should not be seen from the Sabah and Sarawak ‘angle’ alone but from the perspective of the Malaysian federalism. Only when MA63 is seen in its totality that will we be able to effectively implement its provisions.

People in Peninsular Malaysia think that MA63 is about fighting for the rights of Sabah and Sarawak alone when in fact it is about strengthening the spirit of the Malaysian federalism.

MA63 is the bedrock of the Malaysian federalism. It lays the foundation for the Federal Constitution. When we strengthen Sabah’s and Sarawak’s position, we uphold the ideals of MA63 and the aspirations of our founding fathers.  

Our founding fathers did not define “equal partnership” clearly nor was it extensively discussed in the committees tasked to propose the constitutional safeguards for Sabah and Sarawak. Many have interpreted equal partnership based on Article 1 of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 in which the 11 states in the then Malaya are seen as representing one component and the other two components being Sabah and Sarawak.

In 1976, Sabah’s and Sarawak’s status is said to be relegated or downgraded to mere “states” like the other “ordinary” states in Peninsular Malaysia. However, despite the amendment, Sabah’s and Sarawak’s “special position” in the Federal Constitution remained intact. A former Sarawakian MP Edmund Langgu Saga wrote that the amendment was done for the purpose of nation-building (“The ‘1976 amendment’ is an inclusive nation-building effort”, https://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/360760).

Amending Article 1 (2) without specifying equal partnership and how it will affect the country’s federal structure will bring us to the path of uncertainty further down the road.

So, where do we go from here?

First, the provisions of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 must be effectively implemented particularly the recommendations of the Inter-Governmental Committee Report. But before this can be done, the state and federal governments must identify which jurisdictions must be returned to the state or remained under federal control.

Second, any attempt to revisit the MA63 must be done with the aim of restructuring the Malaysia federalism in which the states are empowered to make decisions on their own according to their uniqueness and needs. There is ample evidence linking decentralisation with good governance and economic growth.

Third, the narrative of MA63 in the new Malaysia should be about strengthening the spirit of the Malaysian federalism, creating a sense of belonging to the nation, and increasing a sense of pride towards our nationhood as Malaysians.  

Govern Well and Prove the Critics Wrong

Arnold Puyok

Bersatu’s decision to set up a branch in Sabah has left some Warisan supporters and local-based parties wondering whether the state will be witnessing another episode of a Semenanjung-based party coming to divide and rule the state. Some people have already cautioned Warisan to buckle up lest it will be challenged by Bersatu.   

Should Warisan be concerned at all? What can it do to remain on a strong footing?

The Sarawak PH has already announced that it has accepted Bersatu to be part of the state PH coalition. The Sabah PH is expected to follow suit. And this is set to reconfigure the existing coalition. So, the next few months will be interesting to watch.  While it's important for Warisan to keep its political support intact, it’s even more important for the party to ensure that it has the vision and a plan to develop Sabah. If Warisan can convince the people that it has what it takes to govern effectively, it should not worry about Bersatu because ultimately, it’s the electorates who have the power to decide the best party to rule Sabah.   

Chief Minister and Warisan founder Shafie Apdal’s magnanimous response to Bersatu shows that he understands how the politics of federal-state relations work. It also indicates that he cannot afford to repeat his predecessors’ confrontational approach in dealing with the federal government particularly under Tun Mahathir.

So, there’s no turning back to Warisan. It has to accept the fact that Sabah politics is not the same as before. Sabah is no longer insulated by parochial politics and regional sentiments. It has become a more open society, thanks to the migration of people from Peninsular to Sabah and rampant inter-marriages.

As I have written in my previous article, Bersatu coming to Sabah is to fill the void left by UMNO. The Bersatu supporters in Sabah know that they can obtain the support of the Muslim Bumiputera people and to emerge as an alternative player to Warisan. Their strategy is to be as close as possible to the source of power in KL. But, as for now, Warisan has the advantage as it has five ministers at the federal level and it is the incumbent government.

However, the perception on the ground is that Warisan has so far failed to demonstrate its ability to govern well.

So, what can Warisan do?

First, GE14 was a close call and was not a victorious win for Warisan. Warisan came to power not based on the people’s overwhelming mandate. It came to power through an alliance with PH and UPKO. Thus, with such a “paltry” win, Warisan must do more in order to gain the people’s support. At the moment, the people are waiting – they want to see a vision, a direction and a short-term and long-term economic blueprint for Sabah’s development. They want the government to talk more about new policies and new ideas to propel Sabah to greater heights.

Second, Warisan must strengthen itself internally by sharpening its policy focus and outlook. It has to reinforce its machinery at the grassroots level by roping in individuals with qualifications and experience in administration.

Warisan should not worry about Bersatu going into the Muslim-Bumiputera areas to break its dominance because it can capitalise on its multiracial outlook to get the support of Sabahans from various ethnic backgrounds. But, if Warisan says that it is multiracial, it has to prove that Sabah's ethnic groups are represented well in the administration at the local and state levels.

Third, Warisan must take heed of what the PH-led government has done at the federal level. It is not a "perfect" government but at least under the leadership of Tun Mahathir Mohamad, the government is trying its best to fix the problems facing the country through the establishment of the Council of Eminent Persons and recently the Economic Council. There were also some very promising initiatives announced by the government when Tun Mahathir presented the 11^th Malaysian Plan Midterm Review.

Overall, the people are still waiting for the Warisan-led government’s “grand vision” for Sabah:  where will this government take Sabah to in the next five, ten or 20 years?

If Warisan can prove that it can deliver the public goods effectively, that it has the right people to execute the right policies for Sabah, and that it has the grand vision to transform Sabah into a progressive and developed state, it should not worry about Bersatu and the threats posed by its opponents.

Is Bersatu’s entry into Sabah inevitable?

Arnold Puyok

Prime Minister and Bersatu Chairman Tun Mahathir Mohamad seems to give a signal to Warisan that Bersatu’s plan to spread its wing to Sabah is Bersatu’s prerogative and not Warisan’s.

So, is Bersatu’s entry into Sabah inevitable? Can Warisan convince Bersatu to stay away from Sabah?

Let’s address the first question and put it in the wider context of national politics. Sabah is heading for a change and this is evident since 2008. National-based parties have slowly gained popularity in Sabah. A growing number of Sabahans think that national-based parties are capable of championing state interests as well. They believe that Sabah issues can be brought straight to the attention of the federal lawmakers in parliament.

And if the results of the last three general elections (including GE14) are anything to go by, they show that the national-based parties are more popular than the local-based parties. In GE14, local-based parties like PHRS, PPRS, PKS and PCS contested but lost.

The so-called Gabungan Sabah only garnered five per cent of the popular votes in the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera areas, non-Malay Muslim Bumiputera (17 per cent), Chinese (four per cent) and mixed (six per cent) (Table 1).

STAR Sabah performed slightly better, winning one parliamentary seat in Keningau and one state seat in Bingkor. But like the rest, it was defeated in other areas.

The reasons for the dismal performance of the local-based parties will be the subject of another discussion. But generally, Sabahans were looking for the alternative parties and leaders to represent them. And the claim by the local-based parties that only they can best represent the interests of Sabahans does not hold water anymore. STAR Sabah’s marginal win in Keningau and Bingkor was attributed to a multi-cornered contest, involving strong candidates from Warisan, BN and PH.     

PKR and DAP managed to improve their electoral performance this time, winning eight and six seats respectively at the state and parliamentary levels.

So, given the electoral success of PKR and DAP, there are no reasons why Bersatu would not want to join the fray and to compete particularly in the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera constituencies.

Observers have argued that the direct involvement of national-based parties in Sabah was precipitated with UMNO’s entry in 1991. This is widely regarded as a form of federal intervention in local politics. The presence of UMNO, MCA, PKR and DAP has broken the regional barrier that has insulated Sabah politics for so long. This “nationalisation of local politics” is set to change the course of Sabah politics in years to come.

Now, let’s move on to the second question.

In GE14, BN and the PH-Warisan alliance were equally popular in the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera constituencies (Table 1). Warisan might be successful in ending UMNO’s dominance in the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera areas. However, there are many UMNO’s loyal supporters who remain undecided on what to do next. Those who have left UMNO are eyeing for a new platform to make a comeback. This is where Bersatu could play a role -- to fill the void left by UMNO in the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera areas. 

So, based on this assessment, it would be highly likely that Bersatu would spread its wing to Sabah. If this happens, it would put Warisan in a dilemma. Warisan is convinced that it could gain the support of Sabahans based on its "multiracial" outlook, but the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera communities in Sabah may be more attracted to Bersatu that aspires to emerge as the alternative party to serve their interest.

Table 1 Popular Votes Won by Parties According to Constituency Type at State Level

Party/ Coalition	Popular Vote According to Constituency Type (%)
	Malay-Muslim Bumiputera	Non-Malay Muslim Bumiputera (KDM)	Chinese	Mixed
BN	45.95	45.70	19.86	29.57
Pakatan Harapan-Warisan Alliance	46.30	32.55	74.84	63.43
Gabungan Sabah	4.58	17.10	4.11	5.73
Other	3.17	4.65	1.20	1.28

Source: calculated from the Election Commission (EC) and “The Star Online GE14” (https://election.thestar.com.my/).

Shafie’s year-end rated: The good, the bad... and the ‘we’ll see’

Julia Chan

KOTA KINABALU, Dec 26 ― To say Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal did not have an easy ride to the top is an understatement.

The Semporna native galvanised a fractious Opposition, broke down a Barisan Nasional stronghold despite being thrown into lock-up, and toppled his powerful political nemesis in incongruous fashion, so no one can say he did not have to battle to get to the top. 

However, once in the chief minister’s post he has had to tackle some thorny issues dealing with security, conservation, socio economic development and race, all while living up to high expectations.

Here are what lawmakers from both sides of the political divide, as well as political observers and man on the street, think about his performance:

GOOD

1. Logging ban

Out to clean up allegations of timber monopolies and illegal logging, Shafie’s controversial and drastic decision to ban the export of logs and subsequent review all timber concessionaires was lauded by most people.

“Stopping illegal logging is probably the best thing he’s done so far. It’s two-prong, to stop unrelentless logging and also keep the money within the state and provide jobs. If he can industrialise the timber downstream industry, that would change the state economy,” said Kota Kinabalu MP Chan Foong Hin.

2. Abolishing communal titles

The former administration mooted communal titles for the purpose of preventing individuals from selling their land to “outsiders”, an unpopular decision due to the lack of individual rights it granted its holder, and when Shafie decided to abolish it, it was generally well received.

Despite the pros of the communal title, many preferred the uncomplicated nature of a conventional land title.

3. People skills

Shafie has called himself a chief minister for all Sabahans, across all the races, and has made a point of visiting communities in all regions in the State, and even won the hearts of the Christian community by singing a Christmas carol during a Christmas bazaar at the town ground.

“Everywhere Shafie goes, he is well received ― in the city, in the interior he is going down to the ground and appealing to most Sabahans. He definitely is riding high on popularity, people welcome him everywhere, and his soft spokenness and good manners also earn him a lot of supporters both in urban and rural areas,” said Chan.

BAD

1. Coal mining

When Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad first suggested accessing Sabah’s coal reserves, Sabahans were up in arms, offended that Sabah’s precious natural resources be exploited by “federal powers”. Shafie later said that they would do a feasibility study first, but at the same time alluded that the government might need to take a controversial route for the greater good of the people.

“It goes against their so-called pledge to protect the environment. The Maliau Basin has been protected by the previous governments for the last 30 years. It was tempting but its environment implications ― and the global backlash ― stopped them, and for good reason,” said Kiulu assemblyman Datuk Joniston Bangkuai.

“In an era where we are moving into sustainable methods of harnessing power, its archaic to move back to coal. There is argument for clean coal technology but the mining of coal is almost certain to affect the sensitive ecology. It might bring benefits but it might be ‘political suicide’ in my view.”

 2. Datukship titles

The Sabah governor’s birthday this year came four months after the new administration and saw the entire Sabah Cabinet among 65 people plus some MPs getting the title of Datuk, something that did not sit well with many Sabahans, given how inexperienced some of the ministers were.

“He was rewarding his people too fast ― it’s nice that he’s trying to reward their contribution, but it is exactly the Umno culture people were rejecting. I think this was a lost opportunity for the new government to show they were ‘different’ and were not about reward for their people.

“There’s nothing technically wrong with it, but it was thoroughly unnecessary and gives the wrong impression,” said one prominent lawyer in Sabah.

3. The extension of the governor’s term

The most recent controversy to hit Shafie was the lifting of the two-term limit for the governor as head of state.

Assemblymen questioned the timing ― during a special sitting two weeks ahead of the current Head of State Tun Juhar Mahiruddin’s term expiry, and his involvement in the appointing of two chief ministers after the May 9 polls.

Despite protests from several state assemblymen, the amendment was passed in the state assembly last week with 45 in favour of the change, 15 objecting, and five absent from voting.

 “This move leaves a bad impression for the public and does not bode well for Warisan who has promised government reforms,” said political analyst Arnold Puyok.

“Of course they argued that this was in line with MA63 but rather than focusing on the TYT term, there are more pertinent issues to focus on, such as uplifting the English language as official language in Sabah or seeking the mandate from the state assembly to strengthen Sabah’s position in the federation.”

MA63 refers to the Malaysia Agreement 1963 and TYT is the Malay abbreviation for Tuan Yang Terutama, or Your Excellency in English.

INCONCLUSIVE

1. Dual portfolio

After a contentious route to the chief minister office, Shafie appointed himself as state finance minister. Like Dr Mahathir’s decision to also take on the education portfolio, the decision was criticised but unlike the latter, Shafie chose to retain both portfolios, saying that he would not hold the finance portfolio longer than necessary to sort out the state’s economic “mess”.

“It’s unfortunate that he did not take the more honourable route. But to be fair, Shafie’s Parti Warisan Sabah did not make any promise to not hold dual portfolios, like Pakatan Harapan and  Shafie also has an degree in Economics, which makes him the most qualified for the post,” said a state assemblyman in the Warisan-led government who declined to be named.

“If Shafie is really serious about reforming governance in Sabah, he shouldn’t take a dual ministerial role. The perception now is that, just like his predecessor, Shafie wants to have a total control over how financial resources are being distributed. But his decision not to let state GLCs to be run by elected politicians is laudable,” said Arnold Puyok.

2. Stance on Kaiduan dam and Tanjung Aru Eco Development (TAED)

“Shafie’s party leaders have vocally opposed the two controversial projects pre-GE14, saying that the BN government did not consider the people involved, and promised to scrap the project. But the lack of clear stance now gives the impression that current state government was only pretending to side with the people for votes, and are not doing anything about it now,” said Bangkuai.

“Shafie has to explain why Kaiduan and the TAED are important in terms if their benefits. he has to convince the people as well that the projects will be developed with great care to ensure that the environmental impacts are minimal,” said Puyok.

There has yet to be a decision on either projects.

3. Reversal on pump boat ban

Championing the people’s livelihood, Shafie lifted the ban on pump boats and reintroduced barter trading with southern Philippines which were enforced at the advice of security authorities in the interest of preventing undesirable elements from entering Sabah.

Cross border criminals, including kidnap-for-ransom groups and smugglers, tend to favour pump boats for their speed and ability to move quickly in waters, even when shallow.

 “This could be good for some fishermen and coastal businesses whose livelihood has been affected, but with security at stake, I think the risk is too high. As it is, there are some intrusions and kidnapping happening where the culprits were using pump boats,” said Bangkuai.

4. The case for state rights, and increased oil royalty

Arguably the biggest political question at stake is whether Shafie can compel the federal government to give in to Sabah’s demands to reinstate the state’s right as enshrined in the MA63 as well as fulfill their pledge to increase the oil royalty from 5 to 20 per cent.

“Shafie’s promise of fighting for the oil royalty and MA63 are nothing new. It has been in the agenda of successive governments since PBS. In fact Shafie, in reply to my question at the state assembly, said he was confident the request for 20 per cent oil royalty would be finalised before end of the year. It's already December and there is no concrete indication it could be met,” said Bangkuai.

“He should tackle the MA63 head-on and in a practical manner, unlike many of the so-called Sabah champions who are only interested in raising anti-federal sentiments,” said Puyok.

So how did Shafie score?

While Shafie’s first six months in office have been riddled with a mix of issues, political observers said he has the benefit of doubt from the people, but also carry a lot of expectations in the “new Malaysia.”

“People are expecting some things to happen quickly, like in peninsular Malaysia, but there is a seeming lack of direction when he takes too long to deliberate ― that is the appointing chairmans for boards and GLCs, Tanjung Aru project and even his stance on child marriage could have been a lot better,” said a political analyst who declined to be named.

The analyst said that the Warisan government must be seen to be on equal footing with the federal government, reminding them that several Warisan leaders hold prominent positions in the federal government as should have more authority and accountability.

“For instance, the MA63 and return of 40 per cent of revenue to the state. These things, although tedious in nature, should be delivered to some extent. There should be more evidence of equal partnership or else it is just like before ― an example of federal powers lording over Sabah again.

“I don’t think the public thinks he performed badly, but there is much to do and improve upon, and there has yet to be concrete signs of a “better” government,” he said.

Source: https://www.malaymail.com/s/1706276/shafies-year-end-rated-the-good-the-bad...-and-the-well-see

Pairin's Mixed Legacy

Sabah's former Chief Minister Joseph Pairin Kitingan has finally made the decision to leave politics for good. 

Pairin is synonymous with Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS), a multiracial party he founded in 1985. Pairin would be best remembered for winning the Tambunan by-election against the mighty Berjaya party and subsequently the 1985 and 1986 state elections - a period in Sabah politics marked by betrayals, mayhem in the capital city of Kota Kinabalu, and dramatic incidents in the Istana. Many would also remember Pairin for handing over power in a gentlemanly manner to UMNO in 1994 - an act that earned him respect from his comrades and foes alike. Pairin has personal qualities that very few politicians have: loyal, tactful and forgiving.

In delivering his farewell speech at the PBS 33rd party congress, Pairin took the opportunity to admonish United Pasok Momogun Kadazandusun Organisation (UPKO) for its act of  "betrayal" in the aftermath of the GE14.

There are reasons why Pairin was upset about UPKO. 

Pairin knew that multiracialism was the way forward for Sabah and democracy as an attractive ideology to sell to Sabah's diverse society. PBS was formed based on these core principles. Together with Joseph Kurup (PBRS President), Bernard Dompok (UPKO founding President) and others, he formed PBS in 1985. But PBS that led the Sabah Government from 1985-1994 was removed from power after a spate of resignations from party leaders to form PBRS, SAPP and PDS (later UPKO). To date only PBRS remains in Gabungan Bersatu Sabah with PBS.

Pairin could have retired in style if he pushed for reforms in PBS and chose not to contest in GE14. But changes in PBS were painfully slow, resulting in the party losing its appeal among the key ethnic groups in Sabah including the Kadazandusun. When he decided to contest in GE14 and lost to his younger brother Jeffrey in Tambunan, it only reaffirmed the fact that the Huguan Siou (Paramount Leader of the Kadazandusun) was gradually losing his popularity as political leader.

Now PBS is left with Dr Maximus Ongkili and a handful of Pairin's loyal supporters in the party. All eyes are on Dr Maximus on what he will do next to rejuvenate PBS. PBS can leverage on its decisive win in one Muslim Bumiputera and five Kadazandusun seats in GE14 to position itself as a formidable player in Sabah.

To remain relevant in Sabah's changing political landscape, here are the areas where Dr Maximus has to tackle head-on:

1. To improve the party's image and attract more new members. PBS has strong and very appealing core struggles but it has failed in convincing the young people to join the party. Dr Max's challenge is to make the party more attractive to young professionals and graduates. There are many young people who are attracted to PBS' progressive platform but are discouraged by the old guards' lukewarm attitude towards them. It is easier for PBS to lure the young people as it has a broader policy outlook and experience to represent the multiracial Sabah but the question is, is the party ready to allow fresh and young blood to be part of PBS' rejuvenation programme? If Warisan has Jo-Anna Rampas and Darell Leiking, and UPKO Ewon Benedict, Nelson Angang, Felix Saang, etc, who are the emerging young leaders in PBS? 

2. To increase the number of non- Kadazandusun members in the party. As it is now, PBS is heavily Kadazandusun even though it espouses multiracialism. No non-Kadazandusun or non-Christian has ever been elected president. And more non-Kadazandusun and Chinese members are abandoning PBS to join other parties. To make the party more attractive, it should improve its multiracial composition and more drastically, amend the constitution to allow the party's president to be rotated among the key ethnic groups in Sabah. 

3. PBS should talk more about economic issues ie how to create employment for young Sabahans, how to make Sabah an attractive place for investments, etc. This will not deviate PBS from its core regional struggles. PBS can make a lot of difference if it can relate the MA63, autonomy, Sabah's constitutional rights with people's daily needs. Dr Max should take on the Sabah issues not as an academician and but as a policymaker.

Source: https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2018/11/15/pairin-delivers-emotional-goodbye-speech/ fbclid=IwAR1MYublr1NbAWrVpB6KkYxdueX3CGCsjVLWhBYAg890l1E3kSJuPSdeKUY