Ministerial Consultations on Funding Arrangements for Responding to Loss and Damage
Philippine Statement in Roundtable 1: Delivering on the Sharm El-Sheikh Loss & Damage Mandate

Hon. Maria Antonia Yulo Loyzaga
Secretary, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, The Philippines

We commend the COP28 UAE Presidency for organizing this ministerial consultation, and recognize the efforts of the Transitional Committee in developing a working model of the Loss and Damage Fund by COP28.

Sixty-eight days from now, the world will be headed to Dubai expecting a report from the Transitional Committee. Prioritizing discussions to the most fundamental questions and policies, and limiting ourselves to a basic structure in time for COP28 would be a good crucial path.

We will need an implementing decision on adopting the design, governance arrangements, scope of work, and budgeting or resourcing of the Loss & Damage Fund. Other specific implementation issues can be left in the hands of the Loss and Damage Fund Governing Board, represented by both Developed and Developing Countries.

The involvement and representation of vulnerable countries and communities in decision-making is crucial. Success should be measured by the extent to which these voices are heard and respected. Further, success should be measured by the effectiveness of actions taken, the improvement of the situation for vulnerable populations, and the international community’s commitment to a just and equitable response to the impacts of climate change.

The Philippines would like to see a basic structure of the Loss and Damage Fund at COP28 with the following elements:

First, Responsiveness to Local Needs and Accessibility. By doing away with a straight jacket framework except for the most fundamental of matters, we leave room for flexibility thus ensuring that the Loss and Damage Fund will be relevant and responsive to the needs of people across time. It should not only address the scientific basis of the physical manifestations of climate change but also consider the social, cultural, and environmental impacts that impinge on human development and security.

Populations who suffer the brunt of Loss and Damage should be able to tap the Loss and Damage Fund. Transparency should not be at the expense of accessibility afforded to those affected.

Second, Equitable Financial Mobilization. Common but differentiated responsibilities form the lynchpin of equitable financial mobilization, which should be grounded on the polluter’s pay principle. Funding for Loss & Damage should not divert attention away from mitigation and adaptation efforts.

And third, Operational Transparency. By emphasizing transparency and governance, we aim to prevent misuse or misallocation of funds. Lessons from the past have taught us that opaque governance can lead to inefficiencies, and only with transparency can we ensure that every dollar contributed will actually go to supporting loss and damage amelioration.

The only acceptable progress at this point is to move forward with the operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund at COP28. Any deferment will be the worst disservice to humankind and to the planet.

Let us stop equivocating.

Let us not make the perfect enemy of the good.

Thank you.