Advocates for the 500-litre diesel quota argue that this adjustment is essential for the survival of rural economies in Sabah. In many remote districts, the lack of public transportation and the reliance on diesel-powered four-wheel-drive vehicles make fuel a non-negotiable cost of living. By providing a higher subsidised limit, the government would directly support small-scale farmers and traders who are currently struggling to absorb rising operational expenses.
These supporters emphasize that the current subsidy structure inadvertently penalises those who live furthest from urban centers. When fuel costs rise, the price of transporting goods from rural farms to city markets increases, which in turn drives up food prices for everyone. A targeted quota for these specific regions acts as a stabilizer, ensuring that the cost of essential goods remains affordable while preventing rural businesses from collapsing under the weight of higher energy prices.
Furthermore, proponents suggest that this policy is a matter of regional equity. They argue that residents in East Malaysia face higher costs of living compared to their counterparts in the peninsula, and a one-size-fits-all fuel policy ignores these structural disparities. By implementing a higher quota, the government would demonstrate a commitment to inclusive development, ensuring that the transition to targeted subsidies does not leave rural populations behind.
Ultimately, the goal is to create a more resilient rural economy. Supporters believe that the fiscal cost of providing this extra quota is a small price to pay for the long-term stability of rural communities. By easing the burden on those who keep the agricultural supply chain moving, the government can foster growth and prevent the economic isolation of Sabah's interior regions.