THERE is a broad consensus among analysts, the main political problem in Sabah is sudden switching side or dubbed as frog politics (politik katak). There is even a specific name to that ‘froglician’ (frog + politician).

In a Westminster system switching side is permissible, this is in consonance to democratic principle that is – freedom to choose. Jump-ship to another political party is not a legal issue but rather a question of morality or ethical one.

Of particular note when a politician changed their allegiance to another political party due to political ideology inconsistency, unsympathetic leaders, lost trust of leader this is acceptable.

However, when the manner of a politician defect that lead to the collapse of government this is morally not right. There are so many implications when such thing happen.

It is not just the people mandate is being betrayed, there are other bigger impact such as the governance of the state, economic cost, confusing the state bureaucracy in policy implementation and etc.

Frog politics is not uncommon among politicians ever since 1980s until today.

The political crisis in Sabah today all started after GE-14.

When BN led by Musa managed to form government with STAR, but less than 48 hours we saw six state assembly men defected to Warisan thus they command majority to form government.

BN felt this is a betrayal by UPKO who left the coalition.

The seeds of defections among state assembly men started to grow when there is a change in federal politics. Shafie declared Warisan is not part of Pakatan Nasional pact, thus Sabah become an opposition state. The experience Sabah became opposition state back in the mid 1980s has haunted most politicians, knowing federal government will hold back development funds which could stifled development projects.

The plan to defect become more prevalent once the court dropped Musa’s 46 charges on corruption and money laundering. On the 30th of July 13 DUNs decided to cross over to form new government with Musa.

The Warisan politicians claim the defection is an act betrayal but what would Musa team thinks when UPKO defects? It is an act of betrayal too!

Basically, the political logics for Musa when he has the majority to form the government is to return back his mandate obtained in GE-14.

Unfortunately, the former longest serving Chief Minister unable to form government because Shafie called for snap polls and Tuan Yang Dipertua consented to dissolve the state assembly.

There are many views regarding the dissolution of DUN, many analysts see that the there is no need for snap polls, rather the Governor may want to use YDPA and Perak case as precedent to solve the political crisis.

Anyway, now the mandate has been returned back to the people to decide, though it is not really a congenial time to do so due to COVID-19 and the government may need to spend for more than 100 million to run the election.

As much as political parties benefitted from defection and focus so much on politicking, there is one worrying problem in Sabah, that is economic development.

Overall economic development has stalled even though the state is rich with resources.

This state is ranked fifth as one of the main contributors to the national’s GDP, with its annual average growth rate for the past five years 5 percent.

At its peak, Sabah registered 8.2 percent of its GDP in 2017 and its lowest 1.5 percent on 2018.

Sabah contributes at least 56 percent of its resources to the nation such as, palm oil, oil and gas, cocoa, agriculture produce and etc.

The dominant sector in Sabah is the service industry especially tourism and other business linked to the industry.

As much as this state contributes so much to the nation but the fact remains Sabah still lags behinds so many aspects of socio-economic development.

Sabah’s economy depends so much on exporting raw resources and the volatile tourism sector hence it has limited spin-off effect to the overall economic growth.

One serious problem face by Sabahan is job creation.

Although other sectors have increased in job opportunities, based on the department of statistics (DOSM) data shows that for the past five years the compound annual growth rate (CARG) for overall job creation recorded -4.03 percent, deficit in job creation explains as why there is high unemployment rate in Sabah which accounted for 5.6 percent.

There are around 117,000 people who are actively seeking for job in a tight labour market.

Furthermore, youth unemployment is also recorded the highest as compared to other states in Malaysia.

Jobless youth in Sabah is recorded 8.1 percent in 2019 with at least 23,600 unemployed graduates currently in Sabah. This numbers could easily increase to 30 percent after COVID-19 outbreak.

Cost of living in Sabah is also another serious matter that remains unaddressed.

The latest household income data shows that there are 46.8 percent household income earn less than RM3999.

Despite this number has improved but overall expenditure has increased as well.

Average Sabahan has to spend RM2792 monthly but if the household with four members and above would need to spend RM3099 monthly. Basically, if one household earn RM2000 there is no way they could have decent living given the rising cost in Sabah.

Of particular note, Sabah’s inflation is rate is close to national average. Slow growth in real income level has made life difficult for most Sabahan.

Furthermore, the income level in Sabah also diminishes the ability for most Sabahan to own a house, Khazanah research institute has labelled Sabah is a state where property prices severely unaffordable.

High unemployment and slow growth rate of income in Sabah reveal one of the most severe issue in Sabah – poverty.

Recent data show that Sabah recorded the highest poverty rate with 19.5 percent after the revised version of poverty line index (PLI) RM2582, this means that there are 100,003 people are poor in Sabah,

if there is four person in one household hence the number can reach to 400,000 people are trapped in the vicious cycle of poverty.

Food self-sufficiency is also another worrying problem in Sabah.

This problem becomes more obvious during MCO. Even though Sabah is one of the major contributors of agriculture produce, yet second high import is food which accounted for RM4.1 billion.

Such a large land in Sabah ironically unable to produce its own food, one good example is rice production. Total land for paddy plantation is only 20.8 hectares while Sarawak is 76.2 hectares.

Realising the problem of food self-sufficiency, during MCO the Chief Minister announced new 10,000 acres paddy plantation to increase Sabah rice self-sufficiency.

To be fair with the Warisan government, the National Agriculture Blueprint is devised to achieve food self-sufficiency with emphasis on downstream industry in Sabah, though this plan is quite similar with third National Agriculture Policy, but the blueprint has more comprehensive plan.

Above mentioned problems are just few economic issues faced by Sabahan (there are more but length of the article limits the discussion).

These issues are closely associated with limited diversification of the economy and lack of industrial development.

Lack of these both aspects can lead to uncompetitive market, high unemployment and poverty rate, uneven income distribution, dependent on foreign market, lack of sources of revenue, depends on low value-added production, limited physical infrastructure development, lack of technological advancement.

To promote economic growth, it requires stable political institutions.

Politics and economy are intertwined, both cannot be separated as different entities.

While stable political institutions is necessary condition but it is not sufficient enough if political elite does not initiate economic structural reforms and continue defecting for own political survival.

Whoever form the government in Sabah, this state is at dire need to grow. Sabah economy cannot be a ‘captive market’, focusing on low value-added activities and exporting its resources.

Structural reforms mean the new government needs to come out with industrial policy.

This is the primary key for growth. Industrial policy does not mean building aeroplane or cars, industrial development is linked to manufacturing activities, this is where downstream industries lies in and it is the lynchpin for diversification to spur growth, for example food production, extract important chemical from palm oil, petroleum, or agriculture convert into useful ingredient or any production involves value added activities.

As it stood now the GDP share for manufacturing in Sabah only 7.3 percent.

Meaning the state has yet expand its industrial sectors, Sarawak already recorded double digits for manufacturing sectors.

Industrialising the state can address the perennial high unemployment problem among youth, utilise resources efficiently and somehow can address income gap (with right priority!).

The BN government did come out something close to industrial policy, that is Sabah Development Corridor & Halatuju but this plan focuses on production network along with limited downstream industries in oil and gas industry.

The 26 months Warisan government has explicitly mentioned industrialising the state, most analysts are glad to hear this plan but have yet seen any policy document, perhaps the plan was disrupted by frog politics.

But if the PH-government managed to come out with Shared Prosperity Vision in around 18 months but why can’t Warisan government design its industrial policy in the same time if they are serious about it?

Economic structural reform is not an easy task but possible.

Firstly, the future government needs to seriously consider technocrats in economic policy planning and leading the GLCs.

Sycophants and individual appointment as political rewards need to be reduced by all means.

Any heads of bureaucrat and GLCs that affiliated to certain political parties or having political ambitions will not succeed in economic planning because they could not divorce themselves from self-political interest and overall economic welfare.

Economic planning will be compromised by self-interest and preoccupied by ‘politicking’ rather than working.

Appointing technocrats to lead the bureaucracy is crucial here, there is a serious need to critically assess Sabah’s comparative advantage with sufficient research.

Industrial plans should be back by data and its feasibility, we cannot afford to have top officials or state policy advisors who are mediocre or just ‘muddle through plan’ without having clear assessment.

Similarly, with the GLCs, which is the prime mover for industrialising the state.

The GLCs play important role as ‘big push’ for industrialising the state, the head of the GLCs must have sufficient qualification and special technical expertise to run the organisation.

Political appointment in GLCs somehow inevitable but let someone who are truly technocrats head the GLCs.

Too some extend, it is true that political leader will appoint someone who understand their political inspiration, of course the inspiration is to modernise and industrialise the state to improve the overall economic welfare.

But if political appointment is given to a politician (with little qualification) there is no where they can separate themselves from political interest and development inspiration.

GLCs then will be use as part of their political manoeuvring to serve their self-interest.

As a conclusion, Sabah has all the ingredient to grow and become an industrialised state.

Its geographical factor can position as hub of Borneo for international trade to emerging market such as China and also Kalimantan (soon-to-be Indonesia capital city).

But the institutionalised frog politics that serve own political interest can stall the developing process, if frog continues to exist progressive development will remain as a dream for Sabahan.


* Dr Firdausi Suffian is a Senior Lecturer in Political Economy at UiTM Sabah.

** The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the position of Astro AWANI.