Pacific Islands Forum Mission In Washington Seeking Funding For Resilience Facility
The PRF is a Pacific-owned and led regional fund that has been set up to support Forum member nations to access finance for climate adaptation, disaster preparedness, and early disaster response projects.
Tonga's Prime Minister Dr 'Aisake Eke and Forum boss Baron Waqa are leading the regional efforts in Washington, the Forum Secretariat said in a statement on Wednesday.
It said advocacy mission follows the successful endorsement of the PRF Establishment Agreement (Treaty) by Forum Economic Ministers during their Special Meeting held in Tonga in March of this year.
Dr Eke said that the mission underscores a commitment to drive innovative financing and investment opportunities that suit and relate to the Pacific's unique challenges.
He said the mission is being held to coincide with the global multilateral meetings of the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
"It is an opportunity to further engage the Pacific Islands Forum's development partners and multilateral institutions to support the Pacific-owned and Pacific-led regional resilience financing facility for Pacific communities, without incurring a further debt burden for our Members", he said.
"Our message is simple: the Pacific Islands Forum is serious about the PRF.
"We are saying to our development partners that the time to act is now, and to support the PRF so that we can demonstrate the transformative power of this grant investment vehicle, to predictably finance our communities' resilience needs."
Waqa said the mission was important in advancing the Forum Leaders' collective vision under the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent.
"This advocacy mission is about unlocking new capital flows and scaling up investments in the PRF from transformative partnerships that deliver for our Pacific people," he said.
"We have fundraised about US$150m from COP28 (2023) to COP29 (2024).
"We are committed to mobilising resources to raise the balance of US$350m to reach the US$500m capitalisation target for the PRF by COP31 in 2026.
"We aim to take a ratified PRF Treaty to COP30. We are engaging with institutions and governments that can help the PRF as a Pacific-owned priority to assure access to finance for our communities when we launch our first call for proposals at the 55th Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Meeting in Palau in 2026."
The Forum Secretarait said the PRF Treaty will be presented to Forum leaders at their meeting in September in the Solomon Islands for signature, and thereafter, to deposit their instruments of ratification by the end of 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
6 hours ago
- RNZ News
Trump says Ukraine needs to make a deal after summit with Putin ends without ceasefire
By Steve Holland and Andrew Osborn US President Donald Trump (R) and Russian President Vladimir Putin shake hands at the end of a joint press conference after participating in a US-Russia summit on Ukraine at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska. Photo: AFP / DREW ANGERER US President Donald Trump said Ukraine should agree a deal to end the war with Russia because "Russia is a very big power, and they're not", after holding a summit with President Vladimir Putin that failed to yield a ceasefire. In a major shift, Trump also said he had agreed with Putin that the best way to end the war was to go straight to a peace settlement - not via a ceasefire, as Ukraine and its European allies, until now with US support, have been demanding. Trump's comments came after he met Putin for nearly three hours in Alaska on Friday (local time) at the first US-Russia summit since Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. "It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up," Trump posted on Truth social. The war - the deadliest in Europe for 80 years - has killed or wounded well over a million people from both sides, including thousands of mostly Ukrainian civilians, according to analysts. Trump said he would hold talks at the White House with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on Monday, adding: "If all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin. Potentially, millions of people's lives will be saved." Zelenskiy said after a lengthy conversation with Trump following the Alaska summit that Ukraine was ready for constructive cooperation, and he supported the idea of a trilateral meeting. "Ukraine reaffirms its readiness to work with maximum effort to achieve peace," he wrote on social media. But Putin made no mention of meeting Zelenskiy when speaking to reporters earlier. Russian state news agency TASS quoted Putin's foreign policy aide Yuri Ushakov as saying the possibility of a three-way summit including Zelenskiy had not been discussed. In a post-summit interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity, Trump signaled that he and Putin had discussed potential land swaps and security guarantees for Ukraine. "I think those are points that we negotiated, and those are points that we largely have agreed on," Trump said. "I think we're pretty close to a deal," he said, adding: "Ukraine has to agree to it. Maybe they'll say no." When asked by Hannity what he would advise Zelenskiy, Trump said: "Gotta make a deal." "Look, Russia is a very big power, and they're not. They're great soldiers," he added. Zelenskiy has repeatedly underlined the importance of security guarantees for Kyiv as part of any deal, to deter Russia from launching a new invasion at some point in the future. "We also discussed positive signals from the American side regarding participation in guaranteeing Ukraine's security," he said after his call with Trump. Before the summit, Trump had set the goal of agreeing on a ceasefire in the war and said he would not be happy without it. Putin signaled no movement in Russia's long-held positions on the war, but said he agreed with Trump that Ukraine's security must be "ensured". "We are ready to work on this. I would like to hope that the understanding we have reached will allow us to get closer to that goal and open the way to peace in Ukraine," Putin said at a brief media appearance after the summit where neither leader took questions. He added: "We expect that Kyiv and the European capitals will perceive all of this in a constructive manner and will not create any obstacles. That they will not attempt to disrupt the emerging progress through provocation or behind-the-scenes intrigue." For Putin, the very fact of sitting down face-to-face with the US president represented a diplomatic victory. The Kremlin leader had been ostracized by Western leaders since the start of the war, and just a week earlier had been facing a threat of new sanctions from Trump. Some commentators, especially in Europe, were scathing in their reaction. "Putin got his red carpet treatment with Trump, while Trump got nothing. As feared: no ceasefire, no peace," Wolfgang Ischinger, an ex-German ambassador to the United States, posted on X. "No real progress - a clear 1-0 for Putin - no new sanctions. For the Ukrainians: nothing. For Europe: deeply disappointing." Tatiana Stanovaya, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, said: "Now Trump seems to be shifting most of the responsibility to Kyiv and Europe, but reserving some role for himself." She said, however, that Putin had apparently not succeeded as far as he had hoped in getting Trump to publicly side with him and put pressure on Kyiv. Cold War historian Sergey Radchenko wrote: "Putin is a determined opponent, and, yes, he basically won this round because he got something for nothing. Still, Trump did not sell out Ukraine." After Trump returned to Washington, the White House said he spoke to NATO leaders following the lengthy conversation with Zelenskiy. Espen Barth Eide, foreign minister of NATO member Norway, told reporters in Oslo: "We must continue to put pressure on Russia, and even increase it." Czech Defence Minister Jana Cernochova said the summit had not yielded significant progress toward ending the war but "confirmed that Putin is not seeking peace, but rather an opportunity to weaken Western unity and spread his propaganda." Both Russia and Ukraine carried out overnight air attacks, a daily occurrence in the 3-1/2-year war. Russia launched 85 attack drones and a ballistic missile targeting Ukraine's territory, Ukraine's Air Force said on Saturday. It said its air defense units destroyed 61 of them. The General Staff of Ukraine's Armed Forces said 139 clashes had taken place on the front line over the past day. Russia said its air defences intercepted and destroyed 29 Ukrainian drones overnight. Trump told Fox that he would hold off on imposing tariffs on China for buying Russian oil after making progress with Putin. He did not mention India, another major buyer of Russian crude, which has been slapped with a total 50 percent tariff on US imports that includes a 25 percent penalty for the imports from Russia. "Because of what happened today, I think I don't have to think about that now," Trump said of Chinese tariffs. "I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something, but we don't have to think about that right now." Trump ended his remarks on Friday by telling Putin, "I'd like to thank you very much, and we'll speak to you very soon and probably see you again very soon." "Next time in Moscow," a smiling Putin responded in English. Trump said he might "get a little heat on that one" but that he could "possibly see it happening." - Reuters
NZ Herald
12 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Cabinet minister Goldsmith involved in Seymour's UN letter controversy
On July 1, two days before the letter went to the UN, one of Seymour's advisers sent a draft to Goldsmith's office. 'Attached is the Minister for Regulation's proposed response... He mentioned that we had agreed to run it past your minister before we sent it off,' the email read. Act leader David Seymour sent a blunt letter to the UN after consulting Paul Goldsmith. Photo / Mark Mitchell 'It is a little more direct than what MFAT [Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade] might draft. Please let me know if your minister is happy.' Goldsmith's office responded the next day, asking for a phone call. By the morning of July 3, Seymour's adviser emailed him: 'Goldie is happy for us to send it. He is going to send his own mild MFAT holding letter on behalf of himself and [Māori Development Minister Tama] Potaka.' Seymour replied: 'Okay, great.' His letter was sent to the UN that afternoon. In a statement provided to RNZ on Saturday, Goldsmith said: 'When asked, I did not object to [Seymour] sending the letter, but when commenting on UN matters, it is the Foreign Minister's views that are relevant, not mine.' A spokesperson for Seymour said he had nothing further to add. Emails between Seymour's staff in June canvassed the options for responding to the UN and noted MFAT's preferred approach was a joint reply from 'relevant ministers' Seymour, Goldsmith and Potaka, in line with previous UN communications in 2024. Instead, Peters ultimately issued a Government-wide letter on August 11, striking a softer tone and expressing regret for the 'breakdown in protocol'. The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, Albert K. Barume, had raised concerns on June 12 about Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill, suggesting it failed to recognise Māori traditions or uphold Treaty principles. Seymour's reply branded the critique 'presumptive, condescending and wholly misplaced' and 'an affront to New Zealand's sovereignty'. After news of Seymour's letter broke in July, Luxon told media he agreed with its content but Seymour was wrong to have sent it: 'I expect Winston Peters to be the person that engages with the UN'. – RNZ
Otago Daily Times
12 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Another Cabinet minister caught up in UN letter saga
By Craig McCulloch of RNZ Another Cabinet minister has been caught up in the United Nations letter-writing imbroglio, with new documents showing David Seymour first ran his response past Paul Goldsmith before he sent it. Seymour, writing as Regulations Minister, fired off a blunt reply to the UN in July that prompted public rebukes from both Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Foreign Minister Winston Peters for bypassing proper processes. Seymour refused to concede any mistake but agreed to formally withdraw his letter so Peters could issue one on behalf of the full government. New correspondence, released to RNZ under the Official Information Act, reveals Goldsmith, the Treaty Negotiations Minister, had been looped in early on and appeared comfortable with Seymour's approach. On 1 July, two days before the letter went to the UN, one of Seymour's advisors sent a draft to Goldsmith's office. "Attached is the Minister for Regulation's proposed response... He mentioned that we had agreed to run it past your Minister before we sent it off," the email read. "It is a little more direct than what MFAT might draft. Please let me know if your Minister is happy." Goldsmith's office responded the next day, asking for a phone call. By the morning of 3 July, Seymour's advisor emailed him: "Goldie is happy for us to send it. He is going to send his own mild MFAT holding letter on behalf of himself and [Māori Development Minister Tama] Potaka." Seymour replied: "Ok, great." His letter was sent to the UN that afternoon. In a statement provided to RNZ on Saturday, Goldsmith said: "When asked, I did not object to [Seymour] sending the letter, but when commenting on UN matters, it is the Foreign Minister's views that are relevant, not mine." A spokesperson for Seymour said he had nothing further to add. Earlier correspondence in late June showed Goldsmith's office drafted an initial "holding response" to the UN but requested it be sent with Seymour's letterhead as "the senior Minister for this response". Emails between Seymour's staff also canvassed the options for responding to the UN. It noted MFAT's preferred approach would be a joint reply from "relevant Ministers" Seymour, Goldsmith and Potaka, in line with previous UN communications in 2024. Instead, Peters ultimately issued a government-wide letter on 11 August, striking a softer tone and expressing regret for the "breakdown in protocol". The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, Albert K Barume, had raised concerns on 12 June about Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill, suggesting it failed to recognise Māori traditions or uphold Treaty principles. Seymour's reply branded the critique "presumptive, condescending and wholly misplaced" and "an affront to New Zealand's sovereignty". After news of Seymour's letter broke in July, Luxon told media he agreed with its content but Seymour was wrong to have sent it: "I expect Winston Peters to be the person that engages with the UN."
