Romanian Castles, Palaces and Residences

[Cory]

Originally Posted by RoyalJewelish

Actually they do have an official role, they're diplomats of the country, the head of the house (formerly King Michael, now Crown Princess Margareta) and heir (formerly Crown Princess Margareta, now Princess Elena) are members of the Senate of Romania, the crown princess is president of the Romanian Red Cross




They haven't asked not to live there, there hasn't been any clarification whatsoever





Savarsin Palace is the Christmas residence of the royal family





It is not private property of the daughters, it's owned by the Crown Princess

Crown Princess Margareta also owns the entire Peles park and complex, Peles Castle is a museum but they sometimes do also reside in the smaller castle of Pelisor

No descendants of the King is member of the Senate.
Why only one daughter should own the properties of the late King?

There are three descendants of the King living in Bucharest. If one of them can live with his wife in a private house the others could do certainly the same. Obviously if they have so much money to pay a big rent in a palace it is their choice.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by Cory

No descendants of the King is member of the Senate.
Why only one daughter should own the properties of the late King?

It's common for the direct heir to inherit a property or certain residential rights ahead of other siblings or relations in most monarchies, and Romania therefore follows the norm.

[RoyalJewelish]

Originally Posted by Cory

No descendants of the King is member of the Senate.
Why only one daughter should own the properties of the late King?

There are three descendants of the King living in Bucharest. If one of them can live with his wife in a private house the others could do certainly the same. Obviously if they have so much money to pay a big rent in a palace it is their choice.

I think you're basing your comments on your poor knowledge. Once some of the former rights as representatives of the state were restored to the royal house sometime in 2000, it was also stated that the Head of the House and heir would also be members of the Romanian Senate, of which Crown Princess Margareta and Princess Elena are (even though princess Elena doesn't attend)

What does it matter if there's three or even one, the issue is that a residence is necessary, where they can function their activities, for instance receiving heads of state, new ambassadors and dignitaries. In that residence space is also needed for offices for the staff as well as residential area for use of the royal family

[Cory]

Originally Posted by RoyalJewelish

I think you're basing your comments on your poor knowledge. Once some of the former rights as representatives of the state were restored to the royal house sometime in 2000, it was also stated that the Head of the House and heir would also be members of the Romanian Senate, of which Crown Princess Margareta and Princess Elena are (even though princess Elena doesn't attend)

What does it matter if there's three or even one, the issue is that a residence is necessary, where they can function their activities, for instance receiving heads of state, new ambassadors and dignitaries. In that residence space is also needed for offices for the staff as well as residential area for use of the royal family

Which science fiction law in 2000 appointed members of the King's Family members of the Senate? This is utterly not true. Read articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution to see who are the members of the Parliament.The fact sometimes the daughters of the King are invited at events does not mean they are members of the Senate. If you do not know the Romanian legislation at least do not say others have "poor knowledge".

[RoyalJewelish]

Originally Posted by Cory

Which science fiction law in 2000 appointed members of the King's Family members of the Senate? This is utterly not true. Read articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution to see who are the members of the Parliament.The fact sometimes the daughters of the King are invited at events does not mean they are members of the Senate. If you do not know the Romanian legislation at least do not say others have "poor knowledge".

There wasn't anything mentioned of a law at all, so that's 1) deluded to make up an issue of the previous statement 2) poor knowledge again

King Michael during his remaining lifetime back in Romania was a member of the Romanian senate as well as crown Princess Margareta as well as Princess Elena since the death of her father, these are a few of the many basic things known in Romania about the incorporation of the royal house into state affairs and if there is still disbelief, I'd suggest to view the communications via the Royal Website in regards to the royal house and their involvement of the state (not the government, but the state).

So this has nothing whatsoever to do with commemorative events or the legislation

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by RoyalJewelish

There wasn't anything mentioned of a law at all, so that's 1) deluded to make up an issue of the previous statement 2) poor knowledge again

King Michael during his remaining lifetime back in Romania was a member of the Romanian senate as well as crown Princess Margareta as well as Princess Elena since the death of her father, these are a few of the many basic things known in Romania about the incorporation of the royal house into state affairs and if there is still disbelief, I'd suggest to view the communications via the Royal Website in regards to the royal house and their involvement of the state (not the government, but the state).

So this has nothing whatsoever to do with commemorative events or the legislation

Can you cite a source (a web link, etc.) for the Crown Princess and her sister Elena being members of the Romanian Senate?

I have never read anything along these lines, anywhere.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by RoyalJewelish

There wasn't anything mentioned of a law at all, so that's 1) deluded to make up an issue of the previous statement 2) poor knowledge again

King Michael during his remaining lifetime back in Romania was a member of the Romanian senate as well as crown Princess Margareta as well as Princess Elena since the death of her father, these are a few of the many basic things known in Romania about the incorporation of the royal house into state affairs and if there is still disbelief, I'd suggest to view the communications via the Royal Website in regards to the royal house and their involvement of the state (not the government, but the state).

So this has nothing whatsoever to do with commemorative events or the legislation

King Mihai was not a member of the Senate after 1989 and certainly his daughters have not been either. This is pure invention. The Senate has only elected members and the King has never been an elected member.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by RoyalJewelish

There wasn't anything mentioned of a law at all, so that's 1) deluded to make up an issue of the previous statement 2) poor knowledge again

King Michael during his remaining lifetime back in Romania was a member of the Romanian senate as well as crown Princess Margareta as well as Princess Elena since the death of her father, these are a few of the many basic things known in Romania about the incorporation of the royal house into state affairs and if there is still disbelief, I'd suggest to view the communications via the Royal Website in regards to the royal house and their involvement of the state (not the government, but the state).

So this has nothing whatsoever to do with commemorative events or the legislation

Unless you can indicate a source for this information, it must be discarded as incorrect. There is no information on the websites of the senate of any member of the Royal Family being a formal member of the Senate, and as the senate is a fully elected chamber, it would seem odd if this addition of members would not be mentioned anywhere. As far as I am aware, the last royal member of the Senate was for a short period His late Majesty, King Michael, before he began his 2nd reign as king, prior to WWII.

At any rate, it has very little to do with whether or not the Custodian and the Royal Family will continue to reside in Elisabeta Palace, which, as predicted, is now a resolved issue. Some royals pay taxes, some royals pay rent - It's all a game of cloak and daggers, really, as long as the proposed law has a fiscal component for support of the Royal House. Money paid out, rent paid back in, everyone is happy and the Royal Family can go on with their business of building a case for the monarchy in Romania, and all well-wishers and genuine supporters can spread the good word.

[Cory]

The Teleki Castle of Posmus,Bistrita Nasaud county, will be renewed in order to become a tourist attraction:


Video Castel renăscut din cenușă | Stiriletvr.ro - Site-ul de stiri al TVR

[Cory]

The new prime minister met the eldest daughter of the late King but the controversial bill regarding special privileges for descendants of the late King (including a clear situation for Elisabeta Palace) was not discussed:

Guvernul: Legea Casei Regale este NECONSTITUȚIONALĂ! Viorica Dăncilă NU mai POATE SCHIMBA NIMIC

[RoyalJewelish]

Originally Posted by Cory

The new prime minister met the eldest daughter of the late King but the controversial bill regarding special privileges for descendants of the late King (including a clear situation for Elisabeta Palace) was not discussed:



Guvernul: Legea Casei Regale este NECONSTITUȚIONALĂ! Viorica Dăncilă NU mai POATE SCHIMBA NIMIC

You mean the Crown Princess of Romania

[JR76]

Originally Posted by Cory

The new prime minister met the eldest daughter of the late King but the controversial bill regarding special privileges for descendants of the late King (including a clear situation for Elisabeta Palace) was not discussed:

Guvernul: Legea Casei Regale este NECONSTITUȚIONALĂ! Viorica Dăncilă NU mai POATE SCHIMBA NIMIC

I had the impression the issue regarding the Elisabeta Palace was settled - owned by the State but let to the Royal house.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by JR76

I had the impression the issue regarding the Elisabeta Palace was settled - owned by the State but let to the Royal house.

Nothing was settled yet. The Government seems to wait go see what will happen with the controversial bill in the parliament. Until a final decision the persons living in this residence will probably have to pay rent.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by RoyalJewelish

You mean the Crown Princess of Romania

The one and same indeed, today styled H.M Margareta, Custodian of the Crown, by the government, media and Romanians who know who she is and respect her father, the late King, and the institution of monarchy.

[Duc_et_Pair]

I am curious to see what will happen with the Bill. It would have been controversial in any republic. On the total of the State Budget it means nothing but it is an excellent opportunity for opportunistic politicians to profile themselves. There is a logic to wait and to see what will happen with the Bill before making an agreement about the future of Elisabeta Palace.

[An Ard Ri]

Originally Posted by JR76

I had the impression the issue regarding the Elisabeta Palace was settled - owned by the State but let to the Royal house.

Yes I too was under that impression.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by An Ard Ri

Yes I too was under that impression.

At the beginning of February the time expired according to the Law regarding ex heads of state. The two descendants of the late King that use the palace (one with her husband) continued to live there saying they could pay a rent. When the new prime minister met the eldest daughter of the late Sovereign few days ago she told the press she did not know details about this subject. Nothing has been settled yet.

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

I am curious to see what will happen with the Bill. It would have been controversial in any republic. On the total of the State Budget it means nothing but it is an excellent opportunity for opportunistic politicians to profile themselves. There is a logic to wait and to see what will happen with the Bill before making an agreement about the future of Elisabeta Palace.

Everything depends of the will of the future governments and the rent can always be increased. Obviously nobody speaks a lot about it in order not to raise the reaction of the people.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

I am curious to see what will happen with the Bill. It would have been controversial in any republic. On the total of the State Budget it means nothing but it is an excellent opportunity for opportunistic politicians to profile themselves. There is a logic to wait and to see what will happen with the Bill before making an agreement about the future of Elisabeta Palace.

There is an agreement in place, the palace is let to the Royal Family for a symbolic amount, to ensure they can continue to reside there, while the impression some would create that they are getting their residency for free, is quashed. I suppose one could call it an interim agreement while the bill is handled and decided, but the signals have been that the agreement reached will remain even as part of the planned, revised bill later.
Should the bill fail to come to fruition, the status quo will remain and the RRF will let the palace under current agreed conditions.

[Cory]

Some were very sure the controversial bill would pass until the beginning of February. It did not happened.
Some believed the Family will continue to use the palace for free which is not the case.
If Nicholas de Roumanie Medforth Mills and his wife Alina can live in a house in Bucharest his aunts can do the same.

[RoyalJewelish]

Originally Posted by Cory

Some were very sure the controversial bill would pass until the beginning of February. It did not happened.
Some believed the Family will continue to use the palace for free which is not the case.
If Nicholas de Roumanie Medforth Mills and his wife Alina can live in a house in Bucharest his aunts can do the same.

'His aunts can do the same' is an irrelevant opinion