The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #201  
Old 12-21-2017, 07:15 AM
LadyRohan's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden, Slovenia
Posts: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Jawohl. Befehl ist Befehl!

Come on Cory!
Bonne chance.
__________________

__________________
"He who has never failed to reach perfection, has a right to be the harshest critic" - Queen Elizabeth II
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 12-21-2017, 07:30 AM
LadyRohan's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden, Slovenia
Posts: 566
We can all choose to ignore logic and reason in favour of a campaign against the Royal Family, but surely it doesn’t need to be expressed in 17 consecutive posts?
__________________

__________________
"He who has never failed to reach perfection, has a right to be the harshest critic" - Queen Elizabeth II
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 12-21-2017, 02:11 PM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 2,974
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyRohan View Post
We can all choose to ignore logic and reason in favour of a campaign against the Royal Family, but surely it doesn’t need to be expressed in 17 consecutive posts?
Well, we've all seen this before haven't we...
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 12-21-2017, 03:19 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,670
Different opinions in the main political party regarding the possibility of the King's Family to continue to use the Elisabeta Palace:

http://www.romaniatv.net/mobi/premie...le_394272.html

https://m.antena3.ro/politica/tensiu...le-447600.html
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 12-21-2017, 05:49 PM
Benjamin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 1,837
Not surprised by this about-face from the Romanian government.

This is why one cannot trust fully in the promises of politicians...

Quote:
PM Tudose: Royal Family already has enough properties; they can set up a residence in Savarsin

Prime Minister Mihai Tudose said on Thursday that the Government will give a negative review to the legislation by Liviu Dragnea and Calin Popescu Tariceanu, which proposes that the Royal House of Romania receive several facilities and material benefits.

Tudose argued, 'As far as I know, Romania is a republic, not a monarchy. The Royal House has enough properties – Savarsin, Peles – where they can establish a residence.'
More from: PM Tudose: Royal Family already has enough properties; they can set up a residence in Savarsin - Business Review
__________________
Sii forte.
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 12-22-2017, 09:17 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,670
The government decides what to do with the protocol residences and Elisabeta Palace is in such a category. The different nephews and nieces or grand-nephews and grand-nieces of late Princess Elisabeta can ask for the restitution of the palace.
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 12-22-2017, 03:56 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,323
From an objective point of view I have to agree with the Romanian Prime Minister. They would never give the daughter of a former President a mansion from the State. So why should they give a mansion, for 49 years even, to the daughter of a former head of state, from 70 years ago?

It is the same as giving Chelsea Clinton, the daughter of a former head of state, a mansion paid for by the taxpayers. To give a comparison: in lots of reigning monarchies sons and daughters of the actual head of state have to provide in their very own housing, like we all have to do.
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 12-22-2017, 06:16 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
From an objective point of view I have to agree with the Romanian Prime Minister. They would never give the daughter of a former President a mansion from the State. So why should they give a mansion, for 49 years even, to the daughter of a former head of state, from 70 years ago?

It is the same as giving Chelsea Clinton, the daughter of a former head of state, a mansion paid for by the taxpayers. To give a comparison: in lots of reiging monarchies sons and daughters of the actual head of state have to provide in their very own housing, like we all have to do.
Not all the politicians of the prime minister party agreed with him on this issue.

The President of the Chamber of Deputees (who had proposed the bill about the "Royal House) said that the problem of Elisabeta Palace is in the hands of the government:

http://m.adevarul.ro/news/politica/c...e38/index.html
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 12-23-2017, 01:07 AM
LadyRohan's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden, Slovenia
Posts: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
From an objective point of view I have to agree with the Romanian Prime Minister. They would never give the daughter of a former President a mansion from the State. So why should they give a mansion, for 49 years even, to the daughter of a former head of state, from 70 years ago?

It is the same as giving Chelsea Clinton, the daughter of a former head of state, a mansion paid for by the taxpayers. To give a comparison: in lots of reiging monarchies sons and daughters of the actual head of state have to provide in their very own housing, like we all have to do.
It’s not an entirely apt comparison, as you well know, but it takes a little too much time and sidestepping this thread to once again explain the difference between monarchies and their royal houses, and republics, and their former residents, especially if said monarchy was abolished illegally, etc etc.

The important thing here is that the PM seems to only oppose the residential bit of the law, and not the crux of it, so Im sure that with some gentle navigation and backroom debate, this issue will be resolved. Whether the Royal House will operate from Elisabeta Palace or not is perhaps not the most important thing, but the important factor at this point in time, is to create unity in the family, so the government and republicans who inherently might oppose this, have nothing to point to when they’re looking for a publicly acceptable reason to thwart the process.
__________________
"He who has never failed to reach perfection, has a right to be the harshest critic" - Queen Elizabeth II
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 12-23-2017, 02:41 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyRohan View Post
It’s not an entirely apt comparison, as you well know, but it takes a little too much time and sidestepping this thread to once again explain the difference between monarchies and their royal houses, and republics, and their former residents, especially if said monarchy was abolished illegally, etc etc.

The important thing here is that the PM seems to only oppose the residential bit of the law, and not the crux of it, so Im sure that with some gentle navigation and backroom debate, this issue will be resolved. Whether the Royal House will operate from Elisabeta Palace or not is perhaps not the most important thing, but the important factor at this point in time, is to create unity in the family, so the government and republicans who inherently might oppose this, have nothing to point to when they’re looking for a publicly acceptable reason to thwart the process.
You are avoiding the fish in the soup. Again from an objective view: is it normal that children of former heads of state get housing from the state, paid for by the taxpayer? And I have brought into consideration that there are monarchies in which children of the head of state simply have to provide in their own housing.

What is the convincing argument that the republic has to do this? After all former royal residences have been already returned in the ownership of the former royal family.
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 12-23-2017, 03:08 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,670
The Kings Family have properties where to live and should not look for a compromise asking a residence from the state.
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 12-23-2017, 03:18 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,323
The convincing argument for me would be: "For the execution of the royal dignity, in the new role we are carving out for the former royal family, there needs to be an accomodation befitting the prestige of the former royal family: anyone will understand they have to maintain a certain state".

But a valid argument can also be: "The state will provide an office. For ceremonial purposes the former Royal Palace in Bucharest can be used. There is no need to give Elisabeta Palace for 49 years".
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 12-23-2017, 03:20 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The convincing argument for me would be: "For the execution of the royal dignity, in the new role we are carving out for the former royal family, there needs to be an accomodation befitting the prestige and the dignity of the users."

But a valid argument can also be: "The state will provide an office. For ceremonial purposes the former Royal Palace in Bucharest can be used. There is no need to give Elisabeta Palace for 49 years".
I have to admit that this time I agree with you. For important events the state can allow the Family to use the Royal Palace.


The President of the Senate ( who supported the bill about the King's Family from the beginning) says that to return the use to the State of Elisabeta Palace could be seen as a real step back:

https://www.stiripesurse.ro/calin-po...a_1239353.html
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 12-23-2017, 04:20 AM
LadyRohan's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden, Slovenia
Posts: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
What is the convincing argument that the republic has to do this? After all former royal residences have been already returned in the ownership of the former royal family.
I have yet to see anyone argue that the state of Romania has to do anything, and wherever this process leads, I think the most likely outcome is a compromise between the government, who can't be seen as succumbing to monarchical pressure without actually having the issue of the monarchy on the agenda, and the Royal House, who, no matter from what palace or castle they will run their operations, will again serve the Romanian people in a more formalized way.
__________________
"He who has never failed to reach perfection, has a right to be the harshest critic" - Queen Elizabeth II
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 12-24-2017, 08:40 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,670
The Royal Throne is not at the Royal Palace but at Golesti:

http://evz.ro/tronul-regelui-mihai-gasit.html
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 12-31-2017, 09:04 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,670
A politician asked why the nephews and nieces,grand-nephews and grand-nieces of the late Princess Elisabeta do not ask to become owners of Elisabeta Palace:

https://www.stiripesurse.ro/documente-explozive-despre-averea-casei-regale--dezvaluiri-despre-proprietarul-palatului-elisabeta_1240384.html
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 01-03-2018, 10:30 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kingdom, Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 4,670
Article about Peles Castle in "Point de vue" describing the beginnings of the castle:

http://www.pointdevue.fr/art-de-vivre/la-decouverte-du-chateau-de-pelesh-en-roumanie_4367.html
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 01-06-2018, 07:20 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Birmingham, Canada
Posts: 117
Romanian Castles, Palaces and Residences

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory View Post
The Kings Family have properties where to live and should not look for a compromise asking a residence from the state.


Elisabeta Palace was a private residence, already belonging to a member of the Romanian Royal Family (Princess Elisabeth, daughter of King Ferdinand I and Queen Marie; aunt of King Michael I) so naturally, the palace should be returned to the Royal Family as it was illegally nationalised by the Soviets in Romania!
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 01-06-2018, 07:26 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Birmingham, Canada
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
From an objective point of view I have to agree with the Romanian Prime Minister. They would never give the daughter of a former President a mansion from the State. So why should they give a mansion, for 49 years even, to the daughter of a former head of state, from 70 years ago?

It is the same as giving Chelsea Clinton, the daughter of a former head of state, a mansion paid for by the taxpayers. To give a comparison: in lots of reigning monarchies sons and daughters of the actual head of state have to provide in their very own housing, like we all have to do.


The problem here is that, the Royal Family need a residence in Bucharest! Which is the most populated city and where the Royal Crowds can actually go to.

Another thing I'd like to point out is that, the Palace was built by the private funds of the original owner, Princess Elisabeth of Romania and after her during the socialist republic it was used by the state, so an illegal occupation and nationalisation of somebody's private estate, as they had done with all private owned royal residences. The reason taxpayers pay for the Palace, is because it was the official residence of the Romanian Head of State, who ruled the country longer than anyone in the republic, of course with the exception of the dictators.
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 01-06-2018, 07:35 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,973
If there was a strong enough claim that the Elisabeta Palace was personal property of the family then it surely would have gone back to the family with Savarsin Castle
& Peleş Castle.
I have to say there seems a lot of uncertainty in Romania at the moment. A republic giving the family of a deposed Monarch use of an official residence gives mixed messages IMO.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
castles, palaces, romania, romanian castles, romanian palaces


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Prussian and Hohenzollern Palaces, Castles and other Royal Residences Marengo The Royal House of Prussia and Princely House of Hohenzollern 76 06-14-2020 01:47 PM
Other Historic Palaces, Castles and Residences Alexandria Spanish Royal Residences 41 03-15-2020 10:40 AM
Luxembourg Castles, Palaces and Royal Residences Josefine Grand Ducal Family of Luxembourg 95 02-02-2020 02:44 PM
Royal and Noble Castles and Palaces Freedom Royalty Past, Present, and Future 139 11-18-2019 05:13 PM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes althorp anastasia anastasia once upon a time ancestry bangladesh belgian royal family castles chittagong countess of snowdon danish history dna dutch history dutch royal family dutch royals emperor family tree foundation future games haakon vii henry v hill history house of bourbon house of orange-nassau house of saxe-coburg and gotha interesting israel jacobite jumma kids movie list of rulers lithuanian castles mailing marriage mary: crown princess of denmark monaco history nobel 2019 norway history palaces popularity prince charles prince daniel prince dimitri princess elizabeth pronunciation queen mathilde queen maud royal balls royal court royal events royal family royal wedding shakespeare snowdon spanish history spencer family state visit swedish royal family swedish royalty thailand tracts united states of america unsubscribe usa videos visit from sweden wedding gown wittelsbach


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:23 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×