STATEMENT BY MR VIVEK GANESH, FIRST SECRETARY, PERMANENT MISSION OF SINGAPORE TO THE UNITED NATIONS AT THE PR-LEVEL BRIEFING ON THE ZERO DRAFT OF THE 4TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT OURCOME DOCUMENT AT UNHQ, NEW YORK

Thank you, Excellency,

Singapore aligns itself with the statements delivered on behalf of the G77 and China and AOSIS. We thank the co-facilitators for your hard work to rationalise the numerous input and comments received from member states and stakeholders thus far to produce this zero draft, which we feel provides a pragmatic and realistic capture of the gains and remaining challenges in the international financing architecture in the past decade, and builds on commitments in various FFD-related processes, including the Pact for the Future.

2 I would like to make four brief points based on a preliminary reading of the text.

• First, the international financial architecture must be reformed to accurately reflect the contemporary realities of the global economy, particularly the role, heft, and aspirations of developing countries. We welcome the draft’s acknowledgement of ongoing measures to address imbalances in the voice and representation of developing countries, but would also like to see additional specific measures to correct asymmetries in global economic governance.

• Second, we feel that the text should acknowledge the value and role of regional arrangements in the global financial safety net and explore how such regional arrangements in trade integration, financial connectivity, green and digital economy agreements can be used as successful litmus tests, and be emulated beyond the regional level.

• Third, we welcome the text’s call for a paradigm shift in reliance on credit rating assessments, acknowledging how they can be disadvantageous to developing countries. We would like to see more concrete discussion on what more can be done to incentivise credit rating agencies to extend credit based on long-term growth and sustainability prospects, beyond just enhancing dialogue with them. We could consider:

▪ What other alternatives could we use in regulatory frameworks – sustainability or development taxonomies perhaps?

▪ How can we increase adoption of these alternative risk pricing methods?

• Lastly, we think that one of the largest accelerants of FFD in the past decade was digital technology. While we recognise the ambition in the text, we think the section on financial technologies could benefit from more specific language on how fintech, blockchain, and CBDCs can be leveraged for financial inclusion and health, including by reducing barriers between countries, and of course, with adequate capacity building and support for developing countries to achieve these goals.

Co-facilitators,

3 It is our view that we must have a substantive and meaningful outcome at FFD4. The FFD conference is fundamentally about rebuilding trust and strengthening solidarity in the multilateral system, and it is therefore important to approach our negotiations with a pragmatic and flexible approach. We look forward to working closely with you and to present more views at the 3rd PrepComm following further study of the text.

4 Thank you.

. . . . .