Meet told Sabah faced too many problems after merger

Tan Sri Simon Sipaun said life in Sabah was considerably better in many aspects before Malaysia was formed compared to now.

"Life in Sabah before Malaysia was good to say the least. Admittedly, there was no development then, as seen today, but Malaya was not much better," said the former Vice President of the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) at the United Borneo Front's (UBF) Inter-Party Dialogue and Leadership Exclusive Seminar held at Beverly Hotel, Saturday.

He was making his concluding remarks at the panel discussion which he chaired at the one-day seminar. (Video on Speech)

He said there was no racial problem (in Sabah before Malaysia was formed) while "inter marriages were very common and that's why there are many 'peranakans' in Sabah."

"If Sabahans are now conscious of racial and religious divides, they learned this from Semenanjung. There were no illegal immigrants.

There were no cases of Sabahans losing citizenship status and foreigners gaining it without much difficulty," he said.

"There were no repressive and draconian laws such as the Official Secrets Act, the Internal Security Act, the Printing Presses and Publications Act, the Sedition Act, the Police Act and the Proclamations of Emergency."
"There was no quarrelling over dead bodies. The composition of civil services was multiracial. Meritocracy was appreciated, observed and practised. Corruption and 'ketuanan Melayu' were unheard of.
The list continues. How not to miss pre-Malaysia?" he said.

Sipaun, also said that agreements and related legal rights of Sabah as well Sarawak within the federation of Malaysia are, more often than not, seen as inconvenient truths and preferred to be forgotten than fulfilled.
Citing September 16 as an example, he said the fact that it took the Federal Government 46 years just to admit and officially recognise the date as the birth of Malaysia speaks volumes.

He added the political union between Borneo territories and Malaya was at best an artificial one as the two regions had very little, if any, in common.

"The inclusion of Sabah and Sarawak was an afterthought to counter balance the Chinese population of Singapore. As it happened, Singapore left or were kicked out of the federation in 1965 but continued to progress by leaps and bounds.

"Brunei decided to withdraw from the negotiation at the eleventh hour and has survived well to this day. It remained a big fish in a small pond while Sabah and Sarawak became a small fish in big pond," said Sipaun.
He pointed out that Sabah which is rich in natural resources and once the second richest state is now the poorest in the country while its so called self autonomy is only imaginary, arguing that Malaysia although federal in form is unitary in substance.

Sarawak, he said, was somewhat better than Sabah as its people, in the absence of Umno, still have a say in deciding who is going to be the Chief Minister.

"I believe that there are also more local Sarawakians holding senior and important positions in federal departments in Sarawak.

The illegal immigrant problem is also minimal," he said.

However, he said Sabah and Sarawak do have many things in common since forming Malaysia including, sadly, predicaments.

As such, it is in the best of both states to have very close cooperation and to continuously pool their resources and exchange skills, knowledge and experience to maximise mutual benefits.
He added there is general consensus that Sabah and Sarawak deserve better treatment by Federal in terms of, among others, more equitable distribution of opportunities and development projects.

He noted that the value for development projects for Sabah and Sarawak in the 2011 Budget only amounted to about RM9.55 billion which is "peanuts" compared to the massive RM109.74 billion for Semenanjung.
"One project, namely the 100-storey building located in KL has been allocated RM5 billion which is more than what Sabah received.

Yet both Sabah and Sarawak are producers of oil and gas, which represent an important source of federal revenue.

The term 'fixed deposit' used by Barisan Nasional (BN) in referring to Sabah, said Sipaun is derogatory and insulting, as the central government continues to give lop-sided treatment to the State.
He stressed that during the last general election, it was the voters of Sabah and Sarawak who saved the present government from losing power, so much so that Sabah has now been referred to as a fixed deposit.
"But in return for all these Sabah and Sarawak appear to continue to be short-changed and getting a raw deal," he added.