When the leadership is deemed lame

Leader and the led: Newly minted Labour PM Starmer (left) and Conservative leader Sunak heading for the State Opening of Parliament in Westminster on Wednesday. Pundits are saying Labour didn’t win the elections, the Conservatives lost it. — AP

It might not have been the political party that lost the elections; it might have been the party’s leaders people were fed up with who led their party to ruin.

ONE of the obvious takeaways from the recent UK elections is that the majority of the British electorate was fed up with the Conservatives.

The party led by then prime minister Rishi Sunak only obtained 24% of the total votes, and 121 seats. In the 2019 UK polls, the Conservatives, led by Boris Johnson, won by a landslide: 43% of total votes and 365 seats.

In the July 4 polls, the Labour party looked like it won in a landslide, with 412 seats. But it did so with just a third of the total vote share, 35%.

Labour did not “win” the election. The Conservatives lost it.

Anyone following British politics would know that the Conservatives’ defeat was expected. The party and its leaders, which includes former prime ministers such as Boris Johnson and Liz Truss, along with current leader Sunak, were unpopular. The voters had lost trust in them.

The Conservatives’ defeat is a lesson for Malaysian political parties and politicians. Once the voters are fed up with your performance, they can – or will – kick you out.

Or, in the case of the recent Sungai Bakap state by-election in Penang, some of your voters (I’m looking at you, Pakatan Harapan) will refuse to go out to vote.

In the UK polls, voters disgruntled with the Conservatives but not inclined to vote for Labour had a choice. They could vote for the Liberal Democrats, which got a 12% vote share and 71 seats, or they could go for Reform UK, which obtained 14% of total votes and four seats.

But in Peninsular Malaysia, in our black-and-white politics, you are either with us (Pakatan and Barisan Nasional) or against us (Perikatan Nasional).

The die-hard Pakatan voters don’t have much choice if they want a change. They can either vote for the coalition or abstain from voting as they fear Perikatan.

But for Barisan, especially Umno, traditional voters can switch sides. They can vote for Perikatan.

The situation is different in my home state of Sabah.

We have so many parties that it is not black and white, as in one dominant party/coalition versus one dominant party/coalition.

Even now, it is hard to predict which coalition will be against which coalition in the Sabah state elections, which have to be called by the end of next year.

I’ve been asked who will be with which coalition.

The safest prediction is Pakatan and Barisan in an electoral pact. The other likely pact is Pakatan, Barisan, and Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS), a completely Sabah-based coalition.

But there is no guarantee that GRS will join that coalition, because when the state assembly is dissolved, the coalition might implode.

Then who is the “against us” (Pakatan and Barisan) coalition?

It could be GRS (if it doesn’t join the Pakatan and Barisan pact or if it doesn’t implode) or the United Sabah Front, a name I coined for a Sabah-parties only alliance comprising Parti Bersatu Sabah, Sabah Star, SAPP, Usno, and other parties; or a Warisan Plus pact (Parti Warisan and Parti Kesejahteraan Demokratik Masyarakat).

The dream team is a coalition consisting of only Sabah-based parties such as PBS, Sabah Star, Warisan, and Parti Gagasan Rakyat Sabah (PGRS, which is led by Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Hajiji Noor and is the backbone of GRS).

Most likely – at this moment, anyway – it will be a free for all. Barisan/Pakatan vs Warisan Plus vs PGRS vs PBS/Sabah Star/Usno/SAPP.

Then the real power play starts when the results are out. The ultimate prize is the CM post.

But what is clear in my state is that friends and enemies of GRS, the ruling coalition, are trying to paint a picture of a political villain.

Going back to the UK election, one reason the Conservatives were defeated was that voters were fed up with their leadership – Johnson, Truss, and Sunak.

The same could happen in Sabah. There will be a political villain that certain parties will create to symbolise Sabah’s failure (or should I say, failing). They will attack the figure, hoping the electorate will become fed up with that politician.

There will be a tempias (Sabah word for splatter) effect. The voters will be fed up with the party the political villain leads as well as any parties associated with the “villain”.

It will be the same in national politics.

I’m hearing more and more people cursing a certain political leader they used to love or who they thought could save Malaysia. Just like the British were fed up with Johnson, Truss, and Sunak, supporters of this particular group are fed up with this (national-level) political “villain”.

He/she could end up with the same fate as Sunak’s, losing the 16th General Election.