Opening the second drafting session on the outcome document of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD 3), Co-Facilitator George Talbot, Permanent Representative of Guyana, said “today negotiations begin in earnest; we are embarked on a long road in a very tight time capsule.” The session will focus on a full reading of the zero draft of the FfD 3 outcome document – the ‘Addis Ababa Accord' - which was released on 16 March.
The Co-Facilitators indicated that intersessional meetings will be required before the third drafting session, in order to bring a "clean text" to the Conference.
13 April 2015: Opening the second drafting session on the outcome document of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD 3), Co-Facilitator George Talbot, Permanent Representative of Guyana, said “today negotiations begin in earnest; we are embarked on a long road in a very tight time capsule.” The session will focus on a full reading of the zero draft of the FfD 3 outcome document – the ‘Addis Ababa Accord’ – which was released on 16 March. The Co-Facilitators indicated that intersessional meetings will be required before the third drafting session, in order to bring a “clean text” to the Conference.
The second drafting session is taking place from 13-17 April 2015, in New York, US. Presenting the zero draft, Talbot said it aims to provide: a global framework for financing sustainable development and delivering on the post-2015 development agenda; a platform for concrete actions in this regard; and effective follow-up and implementation. The zero draft is not intended to provide, he said, an “exhaustive menu of actions.”
Talbot said FfD3 will not be a pledging conference, thus Member States should not expect 17 funds for the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), but strong commitments will need to be made. He highlighted that the zero draft contains 50 specific commitments. He stressed the need for a comprehensive approach that includes cross-cutting proposals, especially related to infrastructure, agriculture and energy, while not underplaying the importance of climate finance.
“How we deal with the post-2015 process remains an open discussion,” he further explained, noting that the joint session convening on 21-24 April will offer more details in this regard. He said governments will need to consider the degree of linkage between the monitoring and follow-up of the FfD 3 outcome and of the post-2015 development agenda. With regard to the targets proposed by the Open Working Group on the Sustainable Development Goals on the means of implementation for the SDGs, Talbot highlighted that the zero draft seeks to make the OWG’s targets “more ambitious and operational,” seeing the MOI targets as the point of departure, which are “to be ramped up, not whittled down.”
Finally, Talbot said the zero draft seeks to explicitly address both financial and non-financial MOI; while SDG 17 captures the thrust of the Monterrey Consensus, the FfD 3 zero draft has introduced technology and capacity building.
Opening the exchange of general views on the zero draft, the Group of 77 and China (G77/China) stressed the need to: focus on the economic pillar of sustainable development; respect the policy space of countries; and emphasize official development assistance (ODA), adding that the unfulfilled ODA commitments under the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) should be carried forward. The African Group, Arab States and Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) said the outcome should be based on CBDR, taking into account the right of development and respect for the policy space of developing countries. They emphasized the importance of ODA, technology transfer, capacity building, and data, with the Arab States calling for increasing ODA to 1% of GNI.
The G77/China and Arab States called for direct, Member-State-driven negotiations on the draft text to begin as soon as possible.
The EU underlined that the Addis Ababa outcome should address the three pillars of sustainable development in a balanced manner, and should be crafted as the MOI pillar of the post-2015 development agenda. He called for adding a chapter on policy aspects of MOI – such as good governance, sound institutions, gender equality, and stable regulatory environments – and for strengthening them under each section. He highlighted “shared responsibility,” explaining that all actors should contribute “with their fair share” to implementing the goals, in accordance with their circumstances, noting that the draft fails to capture this paradigm shift from an “outdated” North-South model. He highlighted the “co-benefits” of efforts to address climate change and poverty eradication and said the text should widen this further to include sustainable development.
The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), the Pacific Small Island Developing States (PSIDS), the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), and for the Landlocked Developing Countries (LLDCs) stressed the need to take into account the particular circumstances of countries. PSIDS said “climate finance under UNFCCC must not be counted as part and parcel of the development financing.” CELAC highlighted the importance of peaceful and inclusive societies, good governance and the rule of law, further calling for a plan of action for middle income countries (MICs).
During the week-long meeting, delegates are expected to discuss: Domestic public finance; Domestic and international private business and finance; International public finance; International trade; Debt and debt sustainability; Systemic issues; Technology, innovation and capacity building; and Data, monitoring and follow up. [IISD RS Sources] [IISD RS Story on Zero Draft] [Second Drafting Session Programme] [IISD RS Meeting Coverage][Second Drafting Session website]