Distinguished Co-Facilitators,
Colleagues,

The Group appreciates the work and efforts of the co-facilitators in preparing the REV1 of the FfD Forum outcome document. Notwithstanding, the Group considers that there remains space for further improvement, particularly to better reflect the needs and priorities of developing countries.

Before turning to our section-by-section comments, we wish to reiterate the Group's preference for line-by-line negotiations, as these allow delegations to present their proposals in a structured manner and engage constructively with those put forward by others. That said, we appreciate the co-facilitators' efforts in providing a schedule of informal informals for this week, which will enable more in-depth discussions on each section of the text.

On this basis, we will provide some general comments at this stage in line with the detailed written submission already provided, and look forward to more substantive exchanges during the upcoming informal informals:

Regarding the global financing for development framework:

In general, the Group is supportive of this section. Notwithstanding, we have proposed a number of edits across several paragraphs. With regard to the new subheading entitled "Updates on Implementation", the Group proposes merging this subsection with the "Next Steps" section, retaining the title "Updates on Implementation" and positioning it immediately after the "Data, Monitoring and Follow-up" section. That section should also include references to the Spring and Annual Meetings of the IMF and the World Bank, including to reflect any relevant announcements, as appropriate.

The Group also considers that the paragraph included under the "Cross-cutting Issues" subheading is overly lengthy and, in some instances, re-writes agreed language from Sevilla. While we understand the intention of the co-facilitators to consolidate elements into a single comprehensive paragraph, the Group proposes a more streamlined alternative in order to avoid excessive detail and the reopening of previously agreed language.

Notwithstanding this concern, the Group reaffirms its support for many of the elements contained in the paragraph, including references to the right to development and CBDR. If the co-facilitators decide to proceed with this paragraph, the Group suggests that its elements be separated into distinct paragraphs, based on agreed language from Sevilla or from the written inputs already submitted by the G77.

In regards to domestic and international private business and finance:

The Group considers that this section remains largely aspirational and requires further strengthening to ensure that its paragraphs are action-oriented rather than merely diagnostics. The text should clearly translate agreed mandates into concrete and implementable actions. In this regard, the Group has proposed a number of edits across several paragraphs.

Among its proposals, the Group has included language aimed at supporting the establishment and operationalization of concrete initiatives for the benefit of LDCs, LLDCs, SIDS, MICs, and African countries.

Regarding International trade as an engine for development:

The Group is concerned that international trade is increasingly affected by heightened geopolitical tensions. These dynamics are contributing to a rise in trade-restrictive measures, increased uncertainty, and a more fragmented global trading landscape, as well as a growing competition in strategic sectors, including critical minerals. These tensions and supply chain disruptions are hindering developing countries from integrating into global markets on fair and equitable terms, including through participating in global value chains.

In this regard, the Group has proposed a number of edits to this section, including the addition and substitution of paragraphs, particularly in light of the fact that a significant number of the Group's proposals to the Zero Draft were not reflected in REV1.

The Group is concerned over the rise of protectionist measures, including high tariffs, nontariff barriers and trade distorting practices, which undermine the rules-based multilateral trading system and disproportionately affect developing countries. Similarly, trade-related environmental measures, including unilateral ones like carbon border adjustments, should not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade. The language proposals made by the Group also aim to promote a level playing field and fair competition, while discouraging market distortions. The Group also calls on States to refrain from adopting unilateral economic, financial, or trade measures that are inconsistent with international law and that hinder development, particularly in developing countries.

In regards to the International financial architecture and systemic issues:

The Group considers that REV1 contains important elements and addresses key areas, as was also the case with the Zero Draft. Notwithstanding this, the Group remains of the view that the language requires further strengthening. In this regard, the Group has proposed several additional paragraphs, in line with its previous written submission, particularly given that many of its proposals were not reflected in the current version.

The lack of references to Credit Rating Agencies in the text is not acceptable for the Group, so we maintain our language proposals made for the Zero Draft in this regard, including with regard to MDBs' collective engagement with credit rating agencies.

The Group also proposed language to highlight the need for strengthened international cooperation to address the implications of geopolitical tensions and technological changes on the global monetary system, including digital assets and payment infrastructures, while ensuring greater participation of developing countries in these discussions. For the G77, strengthening the voice and participation of developing countries in the International Financial Institutions is fundamental.

The Group also considers the outcome document should reaffirm the key role of Multilateral Development Banks in supporting development and poverty reduction, while recognizing ongoing reform efforts-such as the G20 MDB Roadmap and the Capital Adequacy Framework-to enhance their lending capacity and effectiveness.

Regarding Data, Monitoring and Follow-up and Next Steps:

Overall, the Group supports the "Next Steps" section. We reiterate the Group's preference to merge "Updates on Implementation" and "Next Steps" into a single section entitled "Updates on Implementation."

Regarding "Data, Monitoring and Follow-up," the Group wishes to reiterate several previously submitted proposals that were not reflected by the co-facilitators, including those concerning South-South cooperation data and the SIDS Centre of Excellence. These additions are in line with the Group's previously stated preference to underscore key achievements and ongoing initiatives and were proposed primarily as revisions to existing paragraphs put forward by the co-facilitators, rather than as standalone paragraphs.

Finally, regarding other actions areas:

The Group remains of the view that the language in this section requires strengthening, particularly to align it with the language in Seville commitment, and has therefore proposed certain edits in this vein.

In the debt paragraph, The Group reiterates its call for inclusion of language on 'initiating the intergovernmental debt process at the United Nations', as well as language regarding the use of innovative debt instruments, such as debt swaps. The group has also proposed language calling to the Group of 20 to strengthen the implementation of the Common Framework for Debt Treatments beyond the Debt Service Suspension Initiative, in a predictable and coordinated manner.

Furthermore, The group once again reiterates its call for inclusion of paragraphs on reaffirming the call on multilateral development banks to expand and optimize their annual lending capacity while maintaining financial sustainability; and underscoring commitments to enhance South-South and triangular cooperation.

Co-facilitators and colleagues,

All of the Group's positions and proposals will be explained in greater detail during the informal informals. We reiterate our commitment to work constructively toward a balanced, ambitious, and action-oriented text that clearly reflects the priorities of developing countries.

I thank you.