The Future of the Norwegian Monarchy

[W.Y.CII]

(..)

When looking back the relatively short history of the NRF, they never have a "proper spare". Olav was the only child of their first king, Harald has two siblings with no succession right, similar to his father Haakon is the only one on the line of succession until 90s. Their royal house is always small. It's risky but I guess they have just got used to it.

 

[iceflower]

Posts that did discuss members of the British Royal Family only have been removed as off-topic. Also please try to stay on topic without wide digressions concerning similar cases in other royal houses. This is about the future of the Norwegian Monarchy only. Thank you!

 

[Blog Real]

A new opinion poll shows that the monarchy still has solid support among the Norwegian people. But only 62% of young people want the monarchy.

In a recent opinion poll conducted by Norstat for NRK, 73 percent say they support the monarchy.

Despite the fact that the monarchy is still strong in Norway, there has, however, been a decline in support in recent years.

Langt færre unge støtter monarkiet

En ny meningsmåling viser at monarkiet fortsatt har solid oppslutning i det norske folk. Men kun 62 prosent av unge voksne vil ha kongedømme.

www.nrk.no

 

[Marengo]

I think that 62% for young people is actually quite a high number. And as they age the support among these people will probably increase as people tend to get more conservative as they age.

 

[polyesco]

Not sure if this is the right thread, but interesting article about Ingrid Alexandra being allowed to be regent.

Loven bør endres: La Ingrid Alexandra regjere

Det vil trolig bli flere tilfeller fremover der Norge er uten regent.

www.aftenposten.no

 

[Muhler]

A very sensible and informative article.
It requires a change of the Constitution and it is possible to carry out that change pretty fast (due to an upcoming general election.) The article doesn't say whether there has to be a referendum in order to make this adjustment to the Constitution. Anyone in the know?
The article, quite rightly, points to the problem of there being so few primary royals in Norway. Right now the NRF are down to one full time working royal and four part time royals. Which IMO is pretty thin.
If Haakon go down for a few months with something, say a poor back, and with King Harald ill a lot these days, Norway has basically become a regency, because Ingrid is not allowed to step in.
And that may raise a genuine debate in Norway: Is there any need for a monarchy?
IMO a monarchy has to stay relevant and in order to stay alive. The primary function of any monarchy being ruling the monarchy and that means someone formally being in charge.

It is also eroding for the NRF if a regency (i.e. the government) takes over each time Haakon is abroad in some capacity (which is also a primary function of any monarchy) because the King is ill.
So the sooner Ingrid can take over, the more experience she will get - and she may need that experience a lot sooner than her contemporaries.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

You've made very thoughtful arguments. For the other side, two years ago Prince Albert II of Monaco altered his house laws on regency to adopt a system which was fundamentally the same as the Norwegian one. Previously, all individuals in line to take throne in Monaco, as well as the spouse or widow/widower of the monarch, were in line for regency also, but following Albert II's reform, if the Crown Prince is under age or incapacitated, the Monegasque regency will be conducted by a council of officials. The Prince must have considered there to be some advantages to the Norwegian system.

 

[kalnel]

A very sensible and informative article.
It requires a change of the Constitution and it is possible to carry out that change pretty fast (due to an upcoming general election.) The article doesn't say whether there has to be a referendum in order to make this adjustment to the Constitution. Anyone in the know?
The article, quite rightly, points to the problem of there being so few primary royals in Norway. Right now the NRF are down to one full time working royal and four part time royals. Which IMO is pretty thin.
If Haakon go down for a few months with something, say a poor back, and with King Harald ill a lot these days, Norway has basically become a regency, because Ingrid is not allowed to step in.
And that may raise a genuine debate in Norway: Is there any need for a monarchy?
IMO a monarchy has to stay relevant and in order to stay alive. The primary function of any monarchy being ruling the monarchy and that means someone formally being in charge.

It is also eroding for the NRF if a regency (i.e. the government) takes over each time Haakon is abroad in some capacity (which is also a primary function of any monarchy) because the King is ill.
So the sooner Ingrid can take over, the more experience she will get - and she may need that experience a lot sooner than her contemporaries.

Your point about the scarcity of full-time royals makes me wonder if they might want to consider a larger role for Sverre Magnus.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

In a recent opinion poll conducted by Norstat for NRK, 73 percent say they support the monarchy.

Despite the fact that the monarchy is still strong in Norway, there has, however, been a decline in support in recent years.

Langt færre unge støtter monarkiet

En ny meningsmåling viser at monarkiet fortsatt har solid oppslutning i det norske folk. Men kun 62 prosent av unge voksne vil ha kongedømme.

www.nrk.no

The NRK poll used to be at around 70% but rose to over 80% in 2014 and 2017.
It was at 78% in 2022 and at 73% in February 2024. And not weird that it has gone down a bit after all the drama with Märtha and Durek.

Another poll, which was conducted by InFact for Nettavisen in March 2024, showed the support at 75% (article).

So the Norwegian monarchy still has the highest support in Europe. (The latest poll in Denmark shows the support for the Danish monarchy at 70%.)

--------------------

I think that 62% for young people is actually quite a high number. And as they age the support among these people will probably increase as people tend to get more conservative as they age.

Yes, 62% support among the 18-29 age group is quite high, but it was at 82% in 2017, but that was before all the Märtha and Durek stuff.

--------------------

Not sure if this is the right thread, but interesting article about Ingrid Alexandra being allowed to be regent.

Loven bør endres: La Ingrid Alexandra regjere

Det vil trolig bli flere tilfeller fremover der Norge er uten regent.

www.aftenposten.no

Yes, an interesting article by the serious and reliable royal historian Trond Norén Isaksen. But that being said, it's never going to happen!

Because I cannot see any of the political parties in the Storting prioritizing this.

--------------------

The article doesn't say whether there has to be a referendum in order to make this adjustment to the Constitution. Anyone in the know?

No, there doesn't need to be a referendum.

--------------------

Your point about the scarcity of full-time royals makes me wonder if they might want to consider a larger role for Sverre Magnus.

CP Haakon has been quite clear that this is not the plan.

 

[Toledo]

You've made very thoughtful arguments. For the other side, two years ago Prince Albert II of Monaco altered his house laws on regency to adopt a system which was fundamentally the same as the Norwegian one. Previously, all individuals in line to take throne in Monaco, as well as the spouse or widow/widower of the monarch, were in line for regency also, but following Albert II's reform, if the Crown Prince is under age or incapacitated, the Monegasque regency will be conducted by a council of officials. The Prince must have considered there to be some advantages to the Norwegian system.

The Norwegian system seems to be the best solution in matters of regency and relatives. Better a team council than a specific, or questionable, royal to protect the institution.

 

[polyesco]

The Norwegian system seems to be the best solution in matters of regency and relatives. Better a team council than a specific, or questionable, royal to protect the institution.

so should the heir be regent at all? or just have a team council deal with cabinet meetings?

 

[Somebody]

In cases such as Norway, where the king stays on even when he has to significantly reduce his activities due to ill health, to me it would make sense to allow others in the direct line of succession (so not only the heir but also the heir to the heir) to step in as temporary regent.