LETTER | According to “Keesing’s Contemporary Archives Nov 2 - 9 1963, page 19,716, Kuala Lumpur and London Talks on Malaysia – Agreement on Establishment of Federation by Malaya, Singapore, Sarawak, Sabah”, it was recorded that:

“The financial questions previously in dispute between Singapore and Malaya were settled in the following manner:

(1) 60 percent of the federal revenues collected in Singapore would be paid to the Singapore government and 40 percent to the federal government;

(2) to assist development in the Borneo territories, Singapore would make available to the federal government a 15 year loan of 100,000,000 Malayan dollars, free of interest for the first five years and a 15 –year loan of 50,000,000 Malayan dollars at current market rates to the Federation (i.e. 150,000,000 Malayan dollars in all, or about £17,500,000 ).”

I am wondering if such financial pledges were properly implemented since 1963 especially since Singapore had “left” Malaysia in August 1965. Also for Sabah's case, it was 40 percent of federal revenue for Sabah and Singapore was 60 percent. Why such a discrepancy?

The other pressing question is, has Malaya fulfilled its pledge to Sabah since 1963? Was it one of the reasons that Singapore “left” Malaysia over such pledges in August 1965?

So now we have been arguing over the terms and conditions of the Malaysia Agreement 63 (MA63) for some years. There is no longer any doubt that MA63 had been breached in all sectors for Sabah and Sarawak.

It is very fresh in our mind that minister Nancy Shukri in 2015 pledged to resolve all the breaches but why are we still talking about MA63 and heading nowhere with no implementation even after 50 years?

Obviously, there has been no good governance since 1963 nationally. The writing is on the wall.

Despite several verbal promises to restore the rights of MA63 for Sabah and Sarawak by the PM, nothing appears as obvious reality. What is really holding up such promises? Would any political party coming to power in Putrajaya resolve such promises promptly and adequately in financial terms?

The rights of MA63 come with very substantial financial implications for all sectors. Isn’t it a great dilemma that such breaches to be restored would need massive financial settlements?

How could Malaysia in its current fiscal scenario come up with such massive financial settlements which can accumulate to trillions of ringgit for Sabah and Sarawak?
There is a flimsy excuse that nothing is owed to Sabah and Sarawak for decades. Would such financial records for various components be kept for the purposes of MA63 for decades?

There is always the easy way out for some leaders to stipulate that the federal government incurred much expenditure in various sectors for decades but such expenditures are irrelevant as there are incurred for collection of revenue.

Even for the Malaysia Plans 1 to 11, Sabah and Sarawak have been very much shortchanged of many billions of ringgit based on 13 states instead of three portions. My book “Sabah Wealth – images of woods power” (2005) does provide the shortchanged quantity till 2000 but it is not conclusive.

Certain rights of MA63 cannot be quantified. Rights as to freedom of religion and education/English language cannot be given a quantum in terms of financial value.

But certain items in the MA63 such as 40 percent of federal revenue to Sabah can be very substantial in the range of up to trillions of ringgit.

Whether the federal government can afford to pay up past dues depends on its fiscal capabilities or its political will to do so.

These overdue substantial funds to come to Sabah and Sarawak should be held in a state sovereign fund to be maintained and managed transparently by a capable and trustworthy independent body for the purpose of good investment for the much neglected current generation and future generations to keep Malaysia intact.

I look forward to a quick settlement of these long overdue funds of MA63. It is no longer in any period of negotiation and discussions which has been endless in recent years since 1969/1976.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.