Crown Princess Mary's Working Visit to New York: September 27-October 1, 2012


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
AnnaNotherThing said:
In my opinion it is events like this that actually widen the gap between rich and poor...It is a high profile talk-fest attended by all the movers and shakers blabbing and blahing about all the problems in the world, raising awareness (hate this phrase) and yet all the while expecting US, the average person trying to make ends meet, maybe not poor but perhaps on the brink and walking the fine line every day to give some of OUR money to a cause that is both overwhelming (where to start?) and media oversaturated (apathy and indifference rule) that the cynic in me tends to think why don't the wealthy classes just forgo all these costly overseas jaunts and just donate directly in lieu of attendance...Now that would impress me! I think royals and whoever else do these things partly to make themselves feel better, that they are somehow contributing to the effort which perhaps eases the guilt of their opulent lifestyle?
Click to expand...
Who knows, maybe she also donated, but unfortunately pictures of Danish kroner don't.sell as well as those of the Crown Princess:flowers:
 
AnnaNotherThing said:
In my opinion it is events like this that actually widen the gap between rich and poor...It is a high profile talk-fest attended by all the movers and shakers blabbing and blahing about all the problems in the world, raising awareness (hate this phrase) and yet all the while expecting US, the average person trying to make ends meet, maybe not poor but perhaps on the brink and walking the fine line every day to give some of OUR money to a cause that is both overwhelming (where to start?) and media oversaturated (apathy and indifference rule) that the cynic in me tends to think why don't the wealthy classes just forgo all these costly overseas jaunts and just donate directly in lieu of attendance...Now that would impress me! I think royals and whoever else do these things partly to make themselves feel better, that they are somehow contributing to the effort which perhaps eases the guilt of their opulent lifestyle?
Click to expand...

In other words you would prefer not to know about the problem, not be informed of ways you could possibly help, just sweep it under the carpet and let somone else take care of the problem if they feel it is of such importance.
No one is forcing you to personally give money and we do not know if Mary herself or the Mary Foundation has given money or if the UN is (since Mary is a UN Spokesperson) directing money towards the problem. No one is even forcing you to learn more about the problem. I don't think Mary has any need to feel guilty about doing her job well or for looking good while doing it.
 
Last edited:
AnnaNotherThing said:
...eases the guilt of their opulent lifestyle?
Click to expand...

Oh my. That old sway backed horse?

I don't know a soul who has truly thought about it that thinks that the hard work and lifestyle of a working royal could possibly be compensated for with mere opulence. Living in a castle is probably just drafty and takes too long to get anywhere. Being a clothes horse can only be fun when you don't *have* to be every time you step into the public eye. Wearing ten pound necklaces can't be fun either. Having nice cars to ride in loses some of its joy when you can't just go out for a drive in the country on Sunday in them. Having access to lots of cash must be a stress and a half when the whole world will have an opinion on how you spend it. Being a walking, talking baby making machine (male or female) must be a little weighty, too. And then there's the constant pressure to be working at public service. And you can never retire. Or change jobs. A bodyguard wherever you go? People waiting to snap a picture when you're chewing or sneezing or sun bathing? Everyone second guessing everything you do...

No, I am guessing opulence is a small, small compensation.

You assume they feel guilty about drafty castles and living in a fishbowl? We should feel guilty for being so damn judgmental. There is not enough opulence in this whole wide world, all piled in one place, to make me feel *envious* of it.

I have respect for those that do it well. BIG respect which has nothing at all to do with their titles and other such superficial nonsense - respect for their willingness to do it at all, frankly.
 
Last edited:
AnnaNotherThing said:
In my opinion it is events like this that actually widen the gap between rich and poor...It is a high profile talk-fest attended by all the movers and shakers blabbing and blahing about all the problems in the world, raising awareness (hate this phrase) and yet all the while expecting US, the average person trying to make ends meet, maybe not poor but perhaps on the brink and walking the fine line every day to give some of OUR money to a cause that is both overwhelming (where to start?) and media oversaturated (apathy and indifference rule) that the cynic in me tends to think why don't the wealthy classes just forgo all these costly overseas jaunts and just donate directly in lieu of attendance...Now that would impress me! I think royals and whoever else do these things partly to make themselves feel better, that they are somehow contributing to the effort which perhaps eases the guilt of their opulent lifestyle?
Click to expand...

Okay, let's do that.

Mary launches the initiative by holding a video conference with a number of selected persons. The press is invited to look on and get a videoclip of Mary giving a speech and saying hello - In Denmark. Oh, they can get some photos as well.
Aaaand how big an interest do you think that will create in the international media?
Just as importantly how many of the key figures internationally would notice this, let alone care?
This is very as much about personal contacts. Why else do diplomats and businessmen travel out to meet their opposite numbers?
 
Last edited:
NGalitzine said:
No one is forcing you to personally give money and we do not know if Mary herself or the Mary Foundation has given money or if the UN is (since Mary is a UN Spokesperson) directing money towards the problem. No one is even forcing you to learn more about the problem. I don't think Mary has any need to feel guilty about doing her job well or for looking good while doing it.
Click to expand...
The Mary Foundation donated money to Maternity Worldwide/Denmark project in Ethiopia a couple of years ago.
The money was used to send a Danish midwife to a clinic in Gimbe for one year.
They also donated money to a joint project in North Uganda with the Danish Refugee Council to provide microloans to poor women.

The Mary Foundation website has information about this but it's only in Danish.
 
AnnaNotherThing said:
In my opinion it is events like this that actually widen the gap between rich and poor...It is a high profile talk-fest attended by all the movers and shakers blabbing and blahing about all the problems in the world, raising awareness (hate this phrase) and yet all the while expecting US, the average person trying to make ends meet, maybe not poor but perhaps on the brink and walking the fine line every day to give some of OUR money to a cause that is both overwhelming (where to start?) and media oversaturated (apathy and indifference rule) that the cynic in me tends to think why don't the wealthy classes just forgo all these costly overseas jaunts and just donate directly in lieu of attendance...Now that would impress me! I think royals and whoever else do these things partly to make themselves feel better, that they are somehow contributing to the effort which perhaps eases the guilt of their opulent lifestyle?
Click to expand...
I like what you said. I agree on many levels.
 
A TV2 article about one of the main items on Mary's agenda in New York: Kronprinsesse Mary kæmper for prævention - TV 2 Nyhederne

Access to prevention/birth control and sexual education, which is in particular aimed at women - they are after all the ones who are getting pregnant.
It is estimated that 200 million people worldwide do not have access to prevention.
Each day 800 women die while giving birth.
As such a task force of 26 people, Mary being one of them, has no been set up to help in regards to providing information about prevention and also basic information in connection with pregnancies and giving birth.
 
Catherine J said:
Oh my. That old sway backed horse?

I don't know a soul who has truly thought about it that thinks that the hard work and lifestyle of a working royal could possibly be compensated for with mere opulence. Living in a castle is probably just drafty and takes too long to get anywhere. Being a clothes horse can only be fun when you don't *have* to be every time you step into the public eye. Wearing ten pound necklaces can't be fun either. Having nice cars to ride in loses some of its joy when you can't just go out for a drive in the country on Sunday in them. Having access to lots of cash must be a stress and a half when the whole world will have an opinion on how you spend it. Being a walking, talking baby making machine (male or female) must be a little weighty, too. And then there's the constant pressure to be working at public service. And you can never retire. Or change jobs. A bodyguard wherever you go? People waiting to snap a picture when you're chewing or sneezing or sun bathing? Everyone second guessing everything you do...

No, I am guessing opulence is a small, small compensation.

You assume they feel guilty about drafty castles and living in a fishbowl? We should feel guilty for being so damn judgmental. There is not enough opulence in this whole wide world, all piled in one place, to make me feel *envious* of it.

I have respect for those that do it well. BIG respect which has nothing at all to do with their titles and other such superficial nonsense - respect for their willingness to do it at all, frankly.
Click to expand...

Bravo :flowers: :clap:! Very, very well said. I think many see the glamour of the royal lifestyle, and forget that there's a lot of work and stress that come with it. It may look delightful from afar, but up close, it's just as nerve-wrecking as a life of someone who has to worry about making deadlines, etc. on his/her 'regular' job. I have a lot of respect for these people as well. They do a great job representing their countries, and smile and nod when on the inside they may be hurting due to a scandal that wasn't their making, family tragedy, or any other issues.

Marika86 said:
Crown Princess Mary arrives at the Ford Foundation building to attend a event about High Level Task Force for ICPD in New York, NY. October 1, 2012

Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** Pic 4 ** Pic 5 ** Pic 6 ** Pic 7 ** Pic 8
Click to expand...

Glad to see that Mary made another visit to 'my' place of residence. I always get excited when we are lucky to get a royal visitor.
 
Marika86 said:
Crown Princess Mary arrives at the Ford Foundation building to attend a event about High Level Task Force for ICPD in New York, NY. October 1, 2012

Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** Pic 4 ** Pic 5 ** Pic 6 ** Pic 7 ** Pic 8
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting pictures, Marika :flowers:

Finally, a little more about her days in New York.
If she took part in this meeting yesterday 18:30 pm (Danish time) and it takes about 9 hours to fly home she may just have landed in Denmark. And in about 3 hours she will be ready for the opening of the Parliament - I won't blame her if it is a bit tired and jetlag affected Mary we will see ;)

Kongehuset has uploaded three photos and some information

http://kongehuset.dk/materialemappe/Images/hltf1.jpg.img
http://kongehuset.dk/materialemappe/Images/hltf3.jpg.img
http://kongehuset.dk/materialemappe/Images/hltf2.jpg.img (The 24 members)

Første møde i High Level Task Force for ICPD - Kongehuset
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Translation of interview in Billed Bladet #40, 2012.
Jeg har fået en stærkere profil – I have gotten a stronger profile.
Interviewer: Ulrik Ulriksen.

Who interviewed Mary in connection of the launching of the initiative Why Poverty in New York.

Mary met Ulrik Ulriksen with the words: “I’m very pleased that you (formal you) are interested in the issue and for how severe the situation is. And it’s a good thing to come out to many Danes with the message that we can do something”.

Q: What do you hope to achieve with this visit to New York?
M: “There are various event I have to take part in while I’m here. But common for all is that it’s about mortality among mothers and women’s health and reproductive rights. So my task/job here in New York is to speak for the cause of the women, to be the voice of the women.
Last evening we were the Why Poverty event. A fantastic thought provoking and provocative initiative from Danmarks Radio (DR1) and BBC, which will reach out to more than 500 million people and ask the question Why Poverty? Why does poverty exist in a world that is under constant development. That’s a very important question, which you must not only ask politicians and civil servants but all sorts of people, so that we can start a global debate about how we can fight poverty, because we all wish for a world without poverty.
What I spoke about last night was mortality among mothers, which is still a major problem in the world today, where 800 women die each day. And we can actually save many of these women with fairly cheap and also minor interventions. So it’s easy to save the life of a woman, but it’s one of the jobs that are falling most behind and if you don’t make that succeed then everything else falls behind.
I’m going to take part in more meetings here in New York and (I) have been selected as a member of the so called High Level Taskforce and I’m incredibly pleased with that, because that is an extension of the work I have been doing for many years as patron for Maternity Worldwide, UNFPA, WHO’s European regional office and it’s about continuing the good work with combating mortality among (*) and making sure that the rights that exist today are maintained and in time improved”.

Q: How much do you think it will actually mean that you come here to New York and take part in launching a new project as Why Poverty?
M: “I think the project can have a big significance, if the goals that are set are reached. That is, that we start a global debate. That it isn’t a subject that will be forgotten but that it very much will be put on the agenda. And I would like to add my voice in order to help and to create the biggest awareness about this project”.

Q: What role do you think that you yourself and Denmark as a nation play in the work of putting focus on women’s health, rights and opportunities?
M: “Denmark is a leader in the context. It is very much known that Denmark is a strong player when it comes to ensure that reproductive and sexual health and rights are for all and not just for the few. And also that we ensure that that all people have a right for family planning. In that context Denmark is very clear in it’s views: That all these rights are for all, no matter where in the world you live and no matter who you are”.

Q: There is in UN talked a lot about problems regarding poverty in the world and the models for solutions can often seem complex and difficult to understand for outsiders. What do you think we specifically can expect form the work of you and others in order to put focus on and solve the problems?
M: “It’s a very complex problem, and an important part of the problem is the unevenly conditions of women. It sounds very simple when we in Denmark talk about rights and access to healthcare and right to decide over your own body. It sounds very simple. But as soon as you start to talk about that in various countries then you experience that cultural and religious conditions influence the debate a lot and then there is some complexity in that, which can be very difficult for many to understand. (**) But when that is said, then there are many good people who are working on establishing a common agenda. And I think we will see – and that is entirely my subjective hunch, of course – I think that we will eventually see a common agenda coming.
But we presumably can’t reach an agreement on everything. And even if we can reach an agreement in Denmark about things, then it’s different when we get out in the big world. In that connection there are so many other subjects that come into play. But if we can continue working on the common agenda that already exist today and (we) can ensure that it doesn’t stall or experience setbacks, then we have gotten far. But I think it will be incredibly difficult to reach any sort of complete agreement”.

Q: You mentioned in your Why Poverty-speech last night at UN that there was a particular documentary in connection with the project that had made a big impression on you. Can you say a little about that?
M: “I haven’t seen the whole documentary Welcome to the World, but parts of it and it has made an incredibly strong impression on me, because it’s about maternity-mortality and it’s about those children who come to the world and lose their mother while giving birth and about what opportunities they have and in particular do not have. When a small family loses its mother, it’s not only the child that suffers.
It’s also the rest of the family. It’s the community and it’s the country. Women are the cores in the family in the developing countries. They reinvest in the family and that lifts not only the family but also the surrounding society.

First part.
 
Last edited:
Continued from above.



Q: It made a big impression on the whole assembly gathered here in UN when you were on the rostrum put focus on this particular problem. It seemed like they almost felt a physical pain when you spoke about this subject. How did you feel on the rostrum, while you told about the issue/problem and your personal opinions in regards to maternity-mortality in developing countries?
M: “I think it’s nice that it’s seen that I’m very passionate about the subject.
When you have visited different developing countries and met for example fistula-stricken women (***) or been to a home where the children have lost their mother and must grow up without parents and without any form of opportunity for the future and when you have been to a maternity-clinic in the developing countries and seen how fortunate women feel by having come to a maternity-clinic – also even if it in our eyes seem primitive – when you have seen that, experienced that, then you feel something special for that cause and that could of course be read and felt in my speech at UN. And then I’m very conscious about how fortunate I am, because I have given birth in a country where there are good healthcare benefits in connection with pregnancy and giving birth. You are in Denmark followed closely during the entire pregnancy and you can give birth under good conditions and if anything happens, there is intervention.
But that’s far from how it is elsewhere in the world. Every year 287.000 women lose their lives in connection with pregnancy and giving birth. And many of the could have survived and taken care of their little child and the rest of their family, if for us, very basic conditions had been better. It’s a vicious circle that is being made. The children who don’t have a mother may not get an opportunity for an education, because they already early on are forced to start working in order to survive. And that pattern we and I must brake”.

Q: You will in November travel to Mozambique in Africa. What do you hope to achieve with the visit?
M: “I look very much forward to that visit. It’s really an exciting schedule. I will travel with our Minister for Development, Christian Friis Bach, and we not only visit projects backed by UNFPA but we will also visit some of DANIDA’s projects (****). In connection with the 50th anniversary of DANIDA it’s a pleasure for me to show and tell the Danes what it they contribute with out I the world. And each Dane is a part of it (through taxes) and we have a very strong tradition for that.
It’s important to come out in the world and see some of the projects and tell the Danes about what we take part in doing for other people out in the world. How many families we save, how many societies we help building. But it’s also very important on speak the cause. That we must continue to fight maternity-mortality. We must ensure that those women who can be saved, will be saved. And that they get access to healthcare. And we must help create conditions, so that each woman has the freedom to decide when she want to be pregnant and with whom. And how many children she would like to have. The woman must be able to plan her family life in the way she wish it to be. And if you cannot control the growth and pattern of the population, then it’s difficult to development at all”.

Q: Last night you stood and spoke to the entire world at a meeting in the UN-building in New York – can you describe the development you, work-wise- have gone through in recent years?
M: “That’s difficult. But I think I have gone through a natural development. Many years ago I sat down with some other people and sort of looked at where I wanted to go. And things have over the years intertwined I the most beautiful way. But it has also been very conscious from my side. And when you deliberately go in one direction, then a lot of other things also come into play at the same time. And that’s what I mean with things having intertwined in a really good way. Many of the protections I accepted many years ago have a great significance for me being here today. And that’s also a reason why I have gotten to where I am today with my work. It’s a part of the journey I have been on”.

Q: Do you feel that you today, due to your greater experience, have more to offer than ever before?
M: “If you talk about the agenda I have here today in New York, then I certainly think I have more to offer.
You acquire a lot of knowledge during a long journey and you develop your network. I have build up a stronger profile during the journey I have been on in the later years”.

(*) Can you say maternity-mortality? Because that’s really what she means. Don’t know if that word even exist.

(**) Not sure what she means in the last bit. Presumably that the added complexity due to culture and/or religion can be difficult to understand.

(***) I have no idea what that is.

(****) Where the CARE projects Joachim visited recently were low-tech and on a grass-root level. DANIDA’s projects are larger and more complex - and dare I say, less successful.
In a TV-programme I watched recently a Danish man was mentioned en passant. He had lived for many years in Southeast Asia and now had a plantation in Tanzania I believe. He had noticed how the locals used a very low-tech kiln to fabricate bricks in Asia and he showed how to build and use such a kiln to the locals in Africa, who then showed it to others. It was extremely simple and used free local materials like mud and wood. Result: a thriving business on village level that was spreading like wildfire and creating jobs. – That showed how one man, one single individual, could make a big difference. No money, no corruption, just mouth to mouth.
 
Muhler said:
Mary launches the initiative by holding a video conference with a number of selected persons. The press is invited to look on and get a videoclip of Mary giving a speech and saying hello - In Denmark. Oh, they can get some photos as well.
Aaaand how big an interest do you think that will create in the international media?
Just as importantly how many of the key figures internationally would notice this, let alone care?
Click to expand...

This sort of thing is already being done. Prince Charles has addressed many international conferences via video link, most recently the big UN sustainability conference in Rio. His address received quite a lot of media attention in the UK and elsewhere.

BBC News - Rio+20: Prince Charles in climate change warning

The only place where Mary's speech in New York was really covered was Denmark. Surely the Crown Princess giving a speech via video link to a UN conference would still have been covered by that same media, only this time at much reduced cost to the Danish taxpayer?
 
EIIR said:
This sort of thing is already being done. Prince Charles has addressed many international conferences via video link, most recently the big UN sustainability conference in Rio. His address received quite a lot of media attention in the UK and elsewhere.

BBC News - Rio+20: Prince Charles in climate change warning

The only place where Mary's speech in New York was really covered was Denmark. Surely the Crown Princess giving a speech via video link to a UN conference would still have been covered by that same media, only this time at much reduced cost to the Danish taxpayer?
Click to expand...



So because Prince Charles as done something once no one is ever do it again? Prince Charles didn't get any coverage in the U.S. Clearly there's a need for such huge problems to be addressed from every possible angle. Perhaps this is a vehicle the UN uses regularly for some of it's appeals.
 
Last edited:
dbarn67 said:
So because Prince Charles as done something one no one is ever do it again? Prince Charles didn't get any coverage in the U.S. Clearly there's a need for such huge problems to be addressed from every possible angle. Perhaps this is a vehicle the UN uses regularly for some of it's appeals.
Click to expand...

I agree. Just because the future King of England speaks doesn't mean anyone would listen.
A message as serious as this needs to be broadcast world wide, as far as I am aware Charles didn't repeat his speech thousands of times in every language.
EIIR said:
This sort of thing is already being done. Prince Charles has addressed many international conferences via video link, most recently the big UN sustainability conference in Rio. His address received quite a lot of media attention in the UK and elsewhere.

BBC News - Rio+20: Prince Charles in climate change warning

The only place where Mary's speech in New York was really covered was Denmark. Surely the Crown Princess giving a speech via video link to a UN conference would still have been covered by that same media, only this time at much reduced cost to the Danish taxpayer?
Click to expand...

I didn't even know he'd done some video chat, so this wasn't reported very well. Seeing as the Crown Princess was in America for a few days to do several engagements on an official visit, I don't see how the taxpayer argument comes into play here. It's not like she went off on her jollies after.
The only place Charles's little chat got coverage was that BBC article apparently. Never heard a peep about it anywhere else.

If a Danish Princess can raise awareness in her country and for the UN what's the issue? Charles isn't the only royal who can do this sort of thing.
 
Last edited:
Once again Muhler you are a treasure for the hard work in taking the time to translate and type it out for us. I and many others appreciate your efforts. cheers
 
Lumutqueen said:
I didn't even know he'd done some video chat, so this wasn't reported very well. Seeing as the Crown Princess was in America for a few days to do several engagements on an official visit, I don't see how the taxpayer argument comes into play here. It's not like she went off on her jollies after.
The only place Charles's little chat got coverage was that BBC article apparently. Never heard a peep about it anywhere else.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you're painting a misleading picture in this instance. As you can see here, it was not only covered prominently on the BBC website (which attracts over 13 million unique users per day), but also across other British and international media:

Rio+20: Prince Charles sends warning to Earth summit | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Video: Rio +20: Prince Charles warning on climate change - Telegraph

HRH The Prince of Wales: Address to the Nobel Laureates Event at the Sustainable Development Conference Rio+20 - Huffington Post

Charles urges action on climate change | The Sunday Times

Rio+20: Prince Charles sends warning to Earth summit - Worldnews.com

Prince Charles Issues Dire Warning on Climatic Change - IBTimes UK

Prince Charles urges action on climate change - Channel 4 News

All these links I got after a 20 second Google search.

My point was made in response to those who said that if Mary hadn't gone to NY and addressed this conference in person, no one would've heard of it. As I've pointed out, you don't have to actually go to these conferences to be involved and to draw media attention to them. The video link is much, much cheaper than making the journey personally, yet it has much the same effect.
 
EIIR said:
This sort of thing is already being done. Prince Charles has addressed many international conferences via video link, most recently the big UN sustainability conference in Rio. His address received quite a lot of media attention in the UK and elsewhere.

BBC News - Rio+20: Prince Charles in climate change warning

The only place where Mary's speech in New York was really covered was Denmark. Surely the Crown Princess giving a speech via video link to a UN conference would still have been covered by that same media, only this time at much reduced cost to the Danish taxpayer?
Click to expand...

I love that you speak with such certainty that that is true. Mary's speech made the news here in New York and my friends tell me also back in Australia. So because it may not be newsworthy in the UK, than it must not be newsworthy in other parts of the world? That's odd logic. Also, by your own estimate, royals should from now on (thanks to this technology) never leave their resident country. Surely Charles and Camilla don't need to visit Australia later this year as he can just provide video speeches for every place they will visit. Right? Think of how much money the British taxpayer would save.

EIIR said:
Sorry, but you're painting a misleading picture in this instance. As you can see here, it was not only covered prominently on the BBC website (which attracts over 13 million unique users per day), but also across other British and international media:

Rio+20: Prince Charles sends warning to Earth summit | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Video: Rio +20: Prince Charles warning on climate change - Telegraph

HRH The Prince of Wales: Address to the Nobel Laureates Event at the Sustainable Development Conference Rio+20 - Huffington Post

Charles urges action on climate change | The Sunday Times

Rio+20: Prince Charles sends warning to Earth summit - Worldnews.com

Prince Charles Issues Dire Warning on Climatic Change - IBTimes UK

Prince Charles urges action on climate change - Channel 4 News

All these links I got after a 20 second Google search.

My point was made in response to those who said that if Mary hadn't gone to NY and addressed this conference in person, no one would've heard of it. As I've pointed out, you don't have to actually go to these conferences to be involved and to draw media attention to them. The video link is much, much cheaper than making the journey personally, yet it has much the same effect.
Click to expand...

What's funny is that you have only provided British news links. Going by your quote above, this means Charles' video link only made news in Britain. In fact, when this took place I only knew about it due to TRF and members here posting the same (British) articles you provided.


Think of the cause Charles was supporting in regards to this discussion: Climate change. It would have been incredibly hypocritical if he was speaking of the detriments carbon producing had on the environment while arriving in a private aircraft that produced thousands and thousands of harmful chemicals...
 
Last edited:
Good for Mary for devoting herself to a difficult topic. Judging the value of her participation in this conference by the amount of media coverage her speech received is really off the mark. That is one small part of a conference. Her presence emphasizes the importance Denmark places on the subject of womens health and rights worldwide. She also learns from and networks with others, and vice versa during the events. These meetings can be a catalyst to something greater and energizing to the participants. Who knows who she met in the elevator, at lunch, or waiting for a cab?
 
I have to admit that I didn't know about Charles either.
I guess he simply doesn't have the same punch here. Partly because we have our own royals and partly because Charles isn't Harry, William or Kate....

And EIIR I can assure you that this issue has a high priority for the present government. The taxpayer issue is considered completely irrelevant in this context.
This was the launching of a new project and personal contacts are very important. In some cultures extremely important in fact - as most businessmen and diplomats can tell you.
If this fails a lot of money will have gone out the window and a couple of plane tickets and a hotel bill is peanuts in comparison.

Is it a good idea to launch such a project right now, when there is still a financial crisis going on?
Yes and no. The amount of money the project will attract will probably be considerably lower than hoped for - initially.
That also applies to attention. - I believe that it will generate less attention intially than hoped for. Especially as no one cares about Africa.

But this is a long term project, they will have to work hard to adapt the intiative while going uphill. So in a few years they may have created a very well made project.

You are welcome, Tarlita :)

And thanks for the info, AnnaNotherThing :flowers:
 
Last edited:
American Dane said:
I love that you speak with such certainty that that is true. Mary's speech made the news here in New York and my friends tell me also back in Australia. So because it may not be newsworthy in the UK, than it must not be newsworthy in other parts of the world? That's odd logic. Also, by your own estimate, royals should from now on (thanks to this technology) never leave their resident country. Surely Charles and Camilla don't need to visit Australia later this year as he can just provide video speeches for every place they will visit. Right? Think of how much money the British taxpayer would save.



What's funny is that you have only provided British news links. Going by your quote above, this means Charles' video link only made news in Britain. In fact, when this took place I only knew about it due to TRF and members here posting the same (British) articles you provided.


Think of the cause Charles was supporting in regards to this discussion: Climate change. It would have been incredibly hypocritical if he was speaking of the detriments carbon producing had on the environment while arriving in a private aircraft that produced thousands and thousands of harmful chemicals...
Click to expand...

I know you can't bear anyone posting anything other than glowing testimonies about how wonderful Mary is. You deliberately paint a totally false picture of what I posted. I didn't say that royals shouldn't leave their own countries, and you know that.

Since when is newsworld.com a British website? The same article appeared on the US Huffington Post as well as the UK version. ibtimes (International Business Times) is also not a British website, but because I'm in the UK it automatically takes me to the British version of the site.

Prince Charles flying to an environmental conference would be no more hypocritical than Princess Mary giving a speech about poverty while wearing designer outifts. You compare Mary giving a speech in NY to Prince Charles travelling to Australia which is totally disingenuous and, I would suggest, beneath you. Charles is the future King of Australia and is making the trip on behalf of the Queen who is, of course, Queen of Australia.

I made a simple suggestion, that wasn't bashing anyone. I simply suggested that Mary could've got the same media coverage and had the same impact via video link. Given Denmark is so into reducing carbon emissions and tackling global warming, I would've thought the Danish royals would be trying to reduce as much as possible their unnecessary overseas trips.

Yet more proof that those who express different opinions are not welcome on the Danish board.
 
EIIR said:
Yet more proof that those who express different opinions are not welcome on the Danish board.
Click to expand...

The same can be said for the British boards. When you come to a thread and deliberately point out that what a Crown Princess is doing is basically 'old news' and Prince Charles has been doing it for yonks, you're going to get backlash because the picture you painted makes Mary look backward which isn't the case.

Mary was doing some good, Charles was doing something good - what's the point in pitting them against each other?
 
EIIR said:
I know you can't bear anyone posting anything other than glowing testimonies about how wonderful Mary is. You deliberately paint a totally false picture of what I posted. I didn't say that royals shouldn't leave their own countries, and you know that.

Since when is newsworld.com a British website? The same article appeared on the US Huffington Post as well as the UK version. ibtimes (International Business Times) is also not a British website, but because I'm in the UK it automatically takes me to the British version of the site.

Prince Charles flying to an environmental conference would be no more hypocritical than Princess Mary giving a speech about poverty while wearing designer outifts. You compare Mary giving a speech in NY to Prince Charles travelling to Australia which is totally disingenuous and, I would suggest, beneath you. Charles is the future King of Australia and is making the trip on behalf of the Queen who is, of course, Queen of Australia.

I made a simple suggestion, that wasn't bashing anyone. I simply suggested that Mary could've got the same media coverage and had the same impact via video link. Given Denmark is so into reducing carbon emissions and tackling global warming, I would've thought the Danish royals would be trying to reduce as much as possible their unnecessary overseas trips.

Yet more proof that those who express different opinions are not welcome on the Danish board.
Click to expand...

sorry, but you find this trip as unnecessary. Obviously others though it was important for the princess to go (including the DRF, advisers and the organizations). In my line of work no amount of teleconferencing can replace an actual person being present. The interest goes way up when you announce that so-so is going to be there.

of course you can comment on the Danish boards, but you seem to just find faults with anything they do. :whistling:
I wonder if you brought up the same concerns in the Norwegian boards, the Crown princess was also in NY for conferences, flew back to Norway for a funeral and then went to California for other conferences. but maybe they haven't heard of teleconferencing :whistling:
 
EIIR said:
Yet more proof that those who express different opinions are not welcome on the Danish board.
Click to expand...

Why do I feel that if Mary did in fact to a Video-link conference, a certain someone might be accusing her of laziness or "phoning it in" (pun intended).

I realize you hold very little regard towards CP Mary et. al., but I have yet to see you write anything positive about her.
Surely you would be taken more serious if everything you said wasn't some attempt to find fault. And then you wouldn't have to end every 3-post argument with "I know you don't want to hear nothing but praise about Mary...".

And while some in here sugarcoat everything Mary does, it doesn't make it your job to provide counterweight at all costs. If you want to find a place that is filled with Mary-battering, go to RD or something. It's a free world and there are lots of places to get your dose of anti-Mary and an audience that will applaud you and reciprocrate.
 
Translation of a Q&A in Billed Bladet #41, 2012.

Where a Ove Nygaard would like to know whether Mary's work in connection with UNFPA isn't a breach of the DRF's political neutrality. And he is here referring directly to a BB article.

Jon Bloch Skipper replies:
In no way. The article was about the humanitarian work that the Crown Princess is doing as a patron for UN's Population Foundation (UNFPA). As such she takes part in the international panel, The High-Level Task Force for the International Conference on Population and Development, whose purpose it is to fight mortality among mothers and to better women's health ona worldwide level.
I am in no doubt that the Crown Princess will step back (remain passive), if the panel is to decide on political questions/issues. If greay areas will arise or there should be doubt, she will confere with the Danish government, because just like the other members of the royal family she is very much aware that the DRf is not allowed to interfere in politics.
As mentioned in the article the work of the Crown Princess on the panel has a wide backing in the Parliament and it has been sanctioned by the Minster for Development. That as you hint yourself is decisive.

BB is up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
CP Mary visits Vanuatu, Fiji and Australia. April 23-28, 2023
2
Replies
39
Views
6K
Muhler
Muhler
doro
State Visits paid by King Carl XVI Gustaf since 1974
Replies
0
Views
852
doro
doro
LadyFinn
Crown Princess Victoria & Prince Daniel's Official Visit to UK: Nov 29-Dec 1, 2023
Replies
17
Views
4K
LadyFinn
LadyFinn
P
CP Frederik & CP Mary's visit to India: February 26 - March 1, 2023
2
Replies
43
Views
9K
Muhler
Muhler
E
Crown Prince Frederik and Crown Princess Mary visit to Vietnam: 1-2 November 2022
2
Replies
47
Views
7K
polyesco
P

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom