By: Martin B. Housanau
Ebey – Kwajalein, Marshall Islands.
As Solomon Islands moves toward the 2027 National Budget, responsibility for continued budget deficits and weak climate finance outcomes can no longer be diffused across government.
It is critical for the Government to seriously consider moving away from budget deficits, and adopting a balanced budget aligned with climate financing for the 2027 fiscal year.
The Government ministries and institutions responsible for drafting the 2027 budget must make tough choices. Accountability now rests clearly with three central institutions: the Ministry of Finance and Treasury (MoFT), the Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (OPMC), and the Policy Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation (PIM&E) Unit.
Climate change is driving up the cost of government, destroying public assets, and undermining service delivery. At the same time, climate change financing is available as non-debt grant funding specifically intended to reduce these pressures. Yet Solomon Islands continues to run structural budget deficits, while climate finance remains poorly integrated, weakly monitored, and inadequately linked to results.
Pacific Countries Climate Financing: Lesson for SIG
Across the Pacific, governments facing the same climate threats and fiscal constraints have made hard, responsible choices. Tuvalu, Marshall Islands, Kiribati, and Vanuatu have deliberately used climate finance to fund climate-resilient schools, clinics, water systems, agriculture, and energy — reducing the burden on their national budgets and protecting their people.
This is no longer a capacity issue for the SIG. Rather an issue of leadership, coordination, and accountability failure at the centre of government.
Treasury and MoFT: Fiscal Leadership Has Fallen Short.
The Ministry of Finance and Treasury is mandated to manage public finances, reduce deficits, and limit borrowing. However, MoFT has failed to:
– Fully integrate climate finance into national budget estimates.
– Demonstrate how climate grants reduce expenditure and borrowing.
– Treat climate finance as a core fiscal instrument rather than a parallel system.
Treasury cannot continue to claim fiscal constraint while allowing grant-based climate financing to sit outside the budget framework. Every climate-damaged asset rebuilt using domestic revenue or loans — when climate grants were available — is a direct failure of public financial management.
OPMC: Policy Leadership Without Delivery.
The Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet is responsible for policy coordination, whole-of-government leadership, and delivery of national priorities. Yet climate finance remains fragmented across ministries, with no strong central direction ensuring that it supports:
– National service delivery priorities.
– Fiscal consolidation and deficit reduction.
– Provincial and community-level resilience.
Without firm leadership from OPMC, climate finance continues to drift — producing strategies, committees, and reports, but failing to translate policy into results.
PIM&E Unit: Monitoring Exists, but Accountability Does Not.
The Policy Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation Unit was established to ensure that government policies deliver outcomes. However, there is no clear public evidence that:
– Climate-funded programmes are systematically tracked against service delivery outcomes.
– Ministries are held accountable for poor climate finance performance.
– Climate investments are evaluated based on fiscal impact and value for money.
Monitoring without consequences is not reform. If climate finance is not reducing deficits, protecting services, or lowering future costs, then PIM&E has a duty to report that failure clearly and publicly.
The 2027 Budget Must Be a Line in the Sand.
The 2027 Budget must mark a decisive shift — not another continuation of business as usual. We therefore suggest that the MoFT, OPMC, and the PIM&E Unit jointly ensure that the 2027 Budget:
– Fully aligns all climate change financing with the national budget, including off-budget grants and donor-managed funds.
– Demonstrates how climate finance contributes to deficit reduction, avoided expenditure, and reduced borrowing.
– Links climate financing directly to service delivery, particularly schools, clinics, water systems, agriculture, and provincial infrastructure.
– Publishes a clear climate finance performance statement, showing results, failures, and corrective actions.
– Commits to a balanced-budget pathway, with climate finance recognised as a central fiscal stabilisation tool.
Critical Pathway for the SIG 2027 Budget.
If the 2027 Budget once again fails to show how climate finance is being used to balance the books, protect services, and reduce future liabilities, then responsibility will rest squarely with Treasury, the Prime Minister’s Office, and the government’s own monitoring system.
Climate change is already reshaping Solomon Islands. Weak leadership at the centre of government is now compounding the damage. The public deserves clarity.
Parliament deserves transparency. And the country deserves a budget that reflects reality.
The 2027 Budget must be climate-financed, fiscally disciplined, and balanced — or those responsible must be held to account.
– END
