EU Explanation of Position: UN Financing for Development Forum: Outcome document

EU Explanation of Position: UN Financing for Development Forum: Outcome document

24 April 2026, New York - Explanation of Position delivered by H.E. Ambassador Gabriella Michaelidou, Deputy Permanent Representative of Cyprus to the UN, on behalf of the European Union and its Member States on the Financing for Development 2026 outcome document

Excellencies, dear colleagues,

I have the honor of delivering this statement/explanation of position on behalf of the EU and its Member States.

I would like to start by thanking their Excellencies Ambassador Anna Jóhannsdóttir of Iceland and Ambassador Ali Naseer Mohamed of the Maldives. They had the tricky and at times ungrateful task of facilitating a document upon which the membership loaded many expectations. That was a tall order.

10 years ago, after the Addis Ababa conference, there was no Forum outcome document. This year, we have a document.

In today's fragmented and polarized world with more challenges than ever and the SDGs seriously off track, it stands as a positive signal that the membership is still able to put differences aside for the sake of a common objective.

Thus we are pleased to have joined consensus on this document.

Let me highlight a few things about that we appreciate:

• It recognises, rightfully so, the dramatic impact of conflicts. There can be no sustainable development without peace and no peace without sustainable development.

• It recognises that implementation of the Sevilla Commitment will depend on all stakeholders' contributions

• It recognizes progress made with regards to several key commitments of Sevilla: on Go Beyond GDP, on the MVI, on South-South and triangular cooperation.

• Finally, we appreciate the shoutout to the government and people of Spain who invested heavily into hosting the conference and ensuring momentum for its follow up with the launch of the Sevilla Platform for Action (SPA)

There are also a few things that we would have liked to see:

• For one, it lacks explicit mention of the existential threat of the triple planetary crisis.

• There are also no references to inequalities, including gender inequality and we would have liked to see language on human rights explicitly in the text as we see this being an integral part of development.

• Likewise initiatives such as the ongoing OECD-DAC review, TOSSD, or the Finance in Common network could have been mentioned, as these are concrete examples of work that is progressing and can meaningfully contribute to implementation.

We also ask that two issues be included in the formal record:

One, while not questioning the language as agreed in the SC, we seriously question the overall balance of the section on international trade that has three entire paragraphs on 'unilateral action/measures' whereas other issues such as market distorting measures and the serious issues these cause, are hardly mentioned. Specifically, we disassociate ourselves from the fact that paragraph 41 is included in this text - it creates an unbalance to the overall .

Secondly, with regard to paragraph 58, we would like to clarify again the EU's position on the Sevilla Commitment debt package. The EU supports this package and will participate actively in its implementation.

However, as underlined repeatedly and explained in detail: the EU dissociated from paragraph 50 (f) of the SC and continues to have the same, serious concerns about the negative consequences of launching an intergovernmental process on debt at the UN. As we reaffirm our support to the debt package, including paragraphs 48, 49 and most parts of paragraph 50, we ask that our concerns and thus dissociation from that aspect of paragraph 58 of this document and on the matter of an intergovernmental process, be understood to continue to stand.

Mr President, I thank you.