Solomon Islands Government defends its US$400,000 Green Climate Fund pledge, citing climate leadership and concessional financing.
Facts about the GCF funding for Tina River Hydro power Project
• Grants represent the largest financial instrument in the GCF portfolio at 43% of total approved funding – GCF support is guided by country ownership. What is approved reflects what the government endorsed.
• A recipient government has the authority to decide on the types of project and financial instruments it wants to pursue with the GCF.
• The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board approved the Tina River Hydropower Development Project (FP044) along with its financial arrangements at its Sixteenth meeting (B.16) on April 6, 2017 – a period when the Opposition Leader was the Prime Minister.
• The GREAT government inherited a project that was finalized and approved when the current Opposition Leader was the Prime Minister.
• GCF Board approved a total funding envelope of US$86 million ($16 million grant for road access) and a US$70 million loan under high-concessional terms compared to other loan conditions SIG has taken from many other lenders.
GCF Loan Repayment & Concessional Conditions
o Loan Amount: $70 million
o Interest Rate: 0.6%
o Loan Duration (Tenor): 40 years total
o Grace Period: 10 years
• Off course the Tina River Hydropower project deal was not the best package in Solomon Islands’ interest. While the GREAT Government cannot change the past, it has the ability to shape and influence future relationships and partnership with international climate funds including the GCF – signing up to the recently approved Regional Programmatic Approach to Climate Action comprising 100% grant of US$250 million from the GCF is evidence of how GREAT administration is influencing how international climate finance is delivered to vulnerable SIDS.
• At COP31, Solomon Islands is advocating for international climate finance to be grant-based, flexible, use national systems and promote country ownership.
Context and basis for Solomon Islands pledge announcement to GCF-3
• Being a SIDS and LDC, Solomon Islands is among the most vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change – there is NO QUESTION ABOUT THIS as it’s safeguarded and recognized in Article 4 of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and Article 9.4 of the Paris Agreement. Doing a voluntary pledge to regional or international climate or resilience facilities/funds does not prejudice Solomon Islands existing obligations or special case of vulnerability.
• As a matter of fact, the Pacific Resilience Facility (PRF) is designed to assist Pacific SIDS build resilience against climate change and disaster impacts. If the region chooses to abide by the same standards of the UNFCCC, then the Pacific SIDS do not have any obligation to create a regional facility to address a phenomenon they did not cause. Yet the region chose otherwise as a demonstration of solidarity and global climate leadership – In fact the GNUT government (which is now in Opposition) announced a higher pledge of US$1 million at the 2025 World Bank/IMF Annual Meeting in Washington D.C. Like the GCF, that US$1 million committed to the PRF was no longer earmarked for climate action in Solomon Islands alone. Yet no one made an issue out of that. Money pledged is not money delivered.
• A decision by a government (cabinet) on any matter (including announcing a pledge to the GCF) is a sovereign decision informed by careful consideration and strategic positioning – no negotiator, country Party or COP decision has any right to question or ask for justification of such a sovereign decision. Solomon Islands Government respects the sovereignty of other countries and does not interfere in their sovereign decisions.
• Solomon Islands motivation to pledge support to GCF-3 is premised on the fact that many vulnerable communities in Solomon Islands are already at the frontlines of climatic impacts. Yet the global community is slow to respond by providing the necessary finance in grant form.
• Noting the urgency, Solomon Islands is faced with two choices – wait and be passive as a climate victim; or being proactive as a global leader to influence other big emitters and industrialized countries to step and provide timely finance towards climate action. GREAT chose the latter.
• Pacific SIDS recognize their role as Big Ocean States and Big Solutions States – It means moving from mere talk to concrete action.
• GCF is the largest multilateral climate fund and a fund for developing countries. Unlike the PRF where Solomon Islands is yet to benefit from a single cent but already committed US$1 million, the GCF has already approved more than US$140 million for the Solomon Islands. Therefore, the pledged amount is a demonstration of Solomon Islands’ recognition of the efficiency reforms undertaken by the GCF and building long-term trust and partnership for the growing pipeline of projects and readiness needs from Solomon Islands that will be brought to the Fund in the near future.
• Solomon Islands pledge to GCF-3 was not intended to push other SIDS or LDCs to contribute unless they decide voluntarily as per Article 9.2 of the Paris Agreement. At the same time, the pledge was not to absolve developed country Parties from fulfilling their legal obligations under Article 9,1 of the Paris Agreement to provide financial resources to assist developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention.
• Solomon Islands pledge to GCF-3 signals a powerful message that climate finance is not just about demanding support from others, but also about demonstrating ownership, solidarity and leadership through action.
• By walking the talk on climate finance as a GCF-3 Champion, standing up for climate justice and demanding accountability from major greenhouse gas emitters, Solomon Islands is setting an important example for the region and the world.
• Solomon Islands decisive action to announce a pledge to GCF-3 is well within the scope of Article 9.2 of the Paris Agreement (“Other Parties are encouraged to provide or continue to provide such support voluntarily”) and Paragraph 30 of GCF’s Governing Instrument adopted by Parties at the COP (“The Fund may also receive financial inputs from a variety of other sources, public and private, including alternative sources”).
SOURCE// OPMC PRESS RELEASE
