The Ise Shima G7 Summit will start tomorrow. CSOs are gearing-up. We had media stunt on the SDGs and a press conference will follow; I’ll bring an Italian perspective as it’s us to host next year’s. Getting ready for a press conference is not just about the speaking order. It’s more about a picking the right Chinese character to convey the message: our expectations for the Summit G7. Or, rather, we’re trying to capture what we want the G7 to do here in Japan. Expectations and emotions ranged from happiness and harmony to universality and solidarity. In the end, we agree that “existence” – how to improve and preserved it – is the right message. ldf
May 24th – joined today the G7 Alernative Summit organized by the Japanese CSO Community in Yokkaichi. I was actually asked to share some messages to bridge this year’s and next year’s Summit, which is to be hosted by Italy. It’d would have not possible not to be impressed by the level of interest and commitment by the participants. The final session was about reporting from the 16 working groups that looked into a wide set of issues from health to youth, from climate changes to the Syria and the refugee crisis. An impressive show of expertise and determination to bring suggestions and concrete proposal in the table. From my end, I shared the feeling their work was clearly pointing to the fact that this whole agenda is about us: development is about people’s well‑being and people’s interests should be at the centre. The other element was that we’re in this together: by working together we can get our voices heard; this was the case of deb cancellation, global health, food and education initiatives. Thank you Aki, Masaki and the whole lot of colleagues behind this. ldf
The global social agenda is over. I heard this argument coming from a development opinion leader at the EU level just last week and it was used in a conversation aiming at promoting development cooperation strategies based on the role of the private sector (no clear distinction was provided as to which private sector we need to have in mind). The key supporting evidence was that the about twenty-five new countries will graduate to MICs within the space of a few years. Is this all? With a different benchmark in mind, we should rather acknowledge that just a handful of countries will instead graduate from the LDCs status by 2020, when the expectations were very different just few years back. Nothing to be happy with; I’m just noting that narrative about how to adejust development cooperation to the 2030 Agenda seems to tilt in the wrong direction. Ldf – 160515
The Addis Ababa compromise does nothing to rectify the wrongs: no new commitments to increasing volumes and improving effectiveness. Well, you may claim this is not utterly accurate: the compromise welcomes the EU’s promise to reach the 0,7% target by 2030, fifteen years later than the original deadline; we’ve not heard about others’ commitments. Is this any good? Hardly so, as it teaches the hard lesson: you can fail your promise without paying any toll. Not to speak about the effectiveness agenda. Yeah, the introduction is peppered with references to ownership and transparency, but the thematic sections are inconsequential, so to speak. And it’s not just that: the limited ODA not available will have to abide by the new narrative that commands aid to be spent catalytically through PPPs and blending. With poor global frameworks, the fate of ODA is basically back in the hands of donor countries with the only safeguards to this backwards/inwards trend offered by the UNDCF and the GPEDC. Ldf
When government delegates arrived at the Financing for Development negotiations on Saturday June 20th, they were welcomed by a Global Tax Body asking them to adopt it. You can follow the @GlobalTaxBody on Twitter!
Also on YouTube now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MpK_ElZSbI
The outcome document for the Third International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD3) is being finalized at the United Nations in New York. This is a key moment to make an assessment and influence the issues under negotiation to ensure progress is not lost in the interests of fact-tracking consensus. The outcome document must establish new ground on a range of issues such as combatting illicit financial flows and global tax cooperation. At a side-event jointly organized by Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, APWLD, Regions Refocus, DAWN, SID, Latindadd, CIDSE, FTC, Eurodad, GPF, Social Watch, Third World Network and ANND, we want to discuss proposals and compromises on the table and look into possible outcomes of the Addis Ababa conference.
Please visist the following pages for additional information:
The large group of CSO organizations, federations and networks that engages in the Financing for Development process conducted a thorough review of the Revised Draft of the FfD Outcome Document. Here is the complete set of language suggestions that the CSO FfD Group believes are necessary for the Addis Ababa Outcome to live up to its development aspirations:
Representatives of the CSO FfD Group addressed that May 11-15 FfD Consultations and conveyed these collective concerns. Here the statements delivered during the Consultations:
Please read the latest letter by the Addis Ababa CSO Coordinating Group to the FfD Co-Facilitators regarding “Civil Society Participation to the Third International Conference on Financing for Development and its Preparatory Process”:
Here is another interesting reading re FFD3. Enjoy! Ldf
The CSO FfD Group delivered its collective statements to each of the agenda items of the Second Drafting Session of the FfD Outcome Document (New York, April 13-17). Each statement was developed through a participatory process within the CSO FfD Group on the basis of the Collective CSO Analysys & Recommendations to the FfD Zero Draft (see separate post to download the document and the three CSO General Statements on the Zero Draft):
here is sth useful to read! ldf
The large group of CSO organizaions and networks that engages in the Financing for Development process conducted a thorough collective examination of the Zero Draft, expressing strong reservations on its capacity to offer a sound basis to advance the agenda for sustainable development and heighten the level of the existing commitments on financing for development.
Civil society also conveyed its general views on the Zero Draft to the opening plenary of the Second Drafting Session. Find below the three statements: