Finances and Employees of the Norwegian Royal Family

[ROYAL NORWAY]

This is a thread for stuff about the Royal Court and the Royal Family's finances, and things have happened lately, so let's go to work:

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

As I mentioned in both the ''Republic or Monarchy'' and the ''Marius Borg Hoiby'' threads, the republican newspaper Dagbladet literally went to war against the monarchy in 2016 with a ridiculous article-series (named kongemakta/royal pover) about the financing of the court and the private finances of the royals. - It consisted of 81 so-called revealing articles and about 60 front pages from April 2016 to Dec 2017.
There were strong reactions from the Storting (the parliament), and even pro-monarchy MPs criticized the court (even though they themselves were responsible for most of the problems).
But there was nothing about these revelations that we didn't know before, and Dagbladet was criticized by two former prime ministers, by some of the so-called experts, and by commentators from other media outlets.

Posters can go through the article-series here: Kongemakta - Dagbladet

But let's go through it and what it's about:

The financing of the monarchy was changed in 2001/2002 following the recommendation of the Royal Court, the Parliament and Government.

The funds that the Royal Court receives from the state become separated from the apanage received by the Regent couple and the CP couple. - And it was then decided that the royals had to cover the refurbishment of private properties from their appanage, while the court covered the state-owned properties.

But Dagbladet ''discovered'' (in 2016) that the court had paid people to do maintenance work on the private properties as well - and this led to an enormous amount of criticism from the media.
It was later discovered that all governments since 2001 had known about it, which also led to criticism towards the politicians.
Well, even we ordinary folks knew about it, because it had been mentioned before, so not a big revelation.

The politicians responsible for royal funding in the parliament then said that it's not the funding who is the problem, and that they would ''gladly increase the appanage, but that the principle that the court's money shouldn't be used on private properties must be continued''.
These politicians were critical of how the court handled this so-called crisis, but after the same politicians were invited to a meeting with the Lord Chamberlain in April 2017, they said that the court should in some cases cover some of the royal family's private expenses.

The article series also ''revealed'' that the monarchy costed more than we thought (according to Dagbladet), and they came up with a number of hidden costs, which we already knew from before, so not a big revelation there either.

They also ''revealed'' some stuff about the CP couple's Foundation:
1. The court uses money on it.
2. The Foundation gives money to organizations who is part of the political debate.
3. The Foundation interferes in the political debate.

Well, we knew about this too, so not a big revelation there either (although I agree with Dagbladet that this is not something the Foundation should be doing).

The only thing they have managed to ''reveal'' is that the court used money on Märtha private holiday home Bloksberg in southeastern Norway, which was bought by King Olav in 1947. - She inherited it from King Harald in 2002.

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

But now Dagbladet has finally managed to dig up some dirt:
The manager of the Royal Palace in Oslo, Ragnar Osnes, has chosen to resign his position with immediate effect because of a breach in the Royal Court’s internal guidelines. This was announced (on April 23) in a press release from the court.
In the press release, the Lord Chamberlain, Gry Mølleskog, stated: ''This breach of trust is serious, and therefore I have accepted his immediate resignation. The Royal Court will, as a consequence of the findings of our internal investigation, make an evaluation of the extended power the position of palce manager has''.

Here is an article about it from Royal Central:
Norway’s Royal Palace manager resigns following a serious breach of internal guidelines – Royal Central

The Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet has received a confirmation from the Royal Court that the internal investigation was initiated after Dagbladet last week sent a number of questions about construction work and one of the last year’s projects in the Palace Park in Oslo. It is at this point unclear which internal guidelines the palace manager broke.

Osnes has been palace manager for the Royal Family since the 90s and has played a key role in renovation the Royal Palace and other Norwegian royal properties. He is an educated architect and has his own company next to his work at the palace.

This of course got a lot of attention in the Norwegian media and overshadowed the CP couple's visit to the Baltic states last week.

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

Well, that was that. - And I hope people found it interesting, because there is more to come (from me, I mean).

 

[Blog Real]

This is interesting. What consequences will it have for the popularity of the monarchy?

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Well, this aggressive hatred towards the monarchy from Dagbladet (because that's what it is), together with the criticism of the CP couple, Marius and Märtha from most other media outlets could potentially have weakened most other monarchies, but not in Norway. - Why?
1. The King's personal popularity, which I have written about in other threads.
2. Unpopular politicians dogged by sex scandals and other controversies, which one can read about in this thread:
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...-the-norwegian-monarch-43060.html#post2017899

So, IMO (and in the opinion of some commentators), this is why the support for the monarchy has grown despite all this criticism.

And as the commentators/experts (including Norway's foremost republican, professor Trond Nordby) says, it will be almost completely impossible to abolish the Norwegian monarchy, even with a controversial and divisive person such as Haakon on the throne.
One can read about it in this post: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f16/norway-republic-or-monarchy-17117-7.html#post2051615

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Like in every other monarchy, personal popularity (who is the most popular member of the RF?) should not be confused with a preference for a constitution (do you prefer to elect the head of state or a hereditary succession?).

Of course it greatly helps when a royal has a good rapport with the people but we may not take it for granted that an approval for a person is convertible in approval for a system of hereditary succession.

Anyway, Norway is SO wealthy and the finances of the Royal House are modest or in line compared with other monarchies: it surprises me that money seems such an issue in Norway....

 

[Mbruno]

Well, this aggressive hatred towards the monarchy from Dagbladet (because that's what it is), together with the criticism of the CP couple, Marius and Märtha from most other media outlets could potentially have weakened most other monarchies, but not in Norway. - Why?
1. The King's personal popularity, which I have written about in other threads.
2. Unpopular politicians dogged by sex scandals and other controversies, which one can read about in this thread:
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...-the-norwegian-monarch-43060.html#post2017899

So, IMO (and in the opinion of some commentators), this is why the support for the monarchy has grown despite all this criticism.

And as the commentators/experts (including Norway's foremost republican, professor Trond Nordby) says, it will be almost completely impossible to abolish the Norwegian monarchy, even with a controversial and divisive person such as Haakon on the throne.
One can read about it in this post: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f16/norway-republic-or-monarchy-17117-7.html#post2051615

The Norwegian constitution prohibits constitutional amendments that change the conatitution’s fundamentals. If we include the monarchy among those fundamentals, which is a reasonable assumption, then the logical conclusion is that it is impossible to legally abolish the monarchy in Norway under the current constitution. I suppose that, if Norway ever became a republic, a constitutional convention would have to be called to draft an entirely new constitution altogether.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

The Norwegian constitution prohibits constitutional amendments that change the conatitution’s fundamentals. If we include the monarchy among those fundamentals, which is a reasonable assumption, then the logical conclusion is that it is impossible to legally abolish the monarchy in Norway under the current constitution. I suppose that, if Norway ever became a republic, a constitutional convention would have to be called to draft an entirely new constitution altogether.

Even the Constitution of Norway is not written in stone. If a majority of the people wants to get rid of the monarchy, we may be sure the ladies and gentlemen parliamentarians will find a loophole to get the republic.

 

[Muhler]

No matter what, abolishing the monarchy will require a change of the Constitution.

If the monarchy is reintroduced in say Greece, it will require a change of the Constitution there as well for that to happen.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Besides that, since the first Norwegian Constitution the country managed to get quite fundamental changes as general suffrage or the separation of Church and State, to name something.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Like in every other monarchy, personal popularity (who is the most popular member of the RF?) should not be confused with a preference for a constitution (do you prefer to elect the head of state or a hereditary succession?).

Of course it greatly helps when a royal has a good rapport with the people but we may not take it for granted that an approval for a person is convertible in approval for a system of hereditary succession.

Anyway, Norway is SO wealthy and the finances of the Royal House are modest or in line compared with other monarchies: it surprises me that money seems such an issue in Norway....

Well, I don't understand your response to my posts.
Because nobody (not the Norwegian commentators or me) confuses personal popularity with support for the institution.
And I have in fact written posts on both topics more than once in these threads.

1. The support for the constitution of the apolitical constitutional monarchy (instead of an apolitical or political president) was at about 65 to 70% from 2003 to 2014.
The King's personal popularity, ie his approval ratings, was in that period much higher than that of the monarchy.

2. For the last 4 years, the support for the monarchy has increased to over 80% in the polls done for NRK (Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation), despite all the criticism mentioned in the above posts.

Why has that happened?
Due to the King's increasing (although always very high) personal popularity, which has had an effect on the institution.
And due to (as I wrote in post 3) unpopular politicians dogged by sex scandals and other controversies.

And then to the last thing you wrote:
It surprises you that money seems such an issue here in wealthy Norway? Well, it's an issue for Dagbladet, not other media outlets or the Norwegian public.

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

The Norwegian constitution prohibits constitutional amendments that change the conatitution’s fundamentals. If we include the monarchy among those fundamentals, which is a reasonable assumption, then the logical conclusion is that it is impossible to legally abolish the monarchy in Norway under the current constitution. I suppose that, if Norway ever became a republic, a constitutional convention would have to be called to draft an entirely new constitution altogether.

Here are some facts about why it will be almost impossible for the politicians to abolish the Norwegian monarchy:

1. Most polls must dip to about (or under) 50%, which is very unlikely, even with Haakon on the throne.

2. There must be a majority in the Storting who wants a republic.

3. The monarchists will demand a referendum, and all the republican politicians agrees with that.

4. The MPs must agree on a model, that will take years.

5. A committee will be created to study the constitution, that will take years.

6. Then there must be a vote in the Storting, on whether the MPs want a referendum or remain as a monarchy.

7. Then there will be a referendum, which the monarchists are likely to win with about 70% to 80% (even with Haakon on the throne).

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

And as some of you perhaps know, the Storting has in fact voted down 12 proposals to abolish the monarchy (since 1972) from the Left-winged Socialist Left Party.
But what had happens if a majority of the MPs had supported it? Absolutely nothing. - Why? Due to the reasons mentioned above (and the republican politicians have said so themselves).

--------------------
BTW, I will be back later with some information about the court.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

But now Dagbladet has finally managed to dig up some dirt:
The manager of the Royal Palace in Oslo, Ragnar Osnes, has chosen to resign his position with immediate effect because of a breach in the Royal Court’s internal guidelines. This was announced (on April 23) in a press release from the court.
In the press release, the Lord Chamberlain, Gry Mølleskog, stated: ''This breach of trust is serious, and therefore I have accepted his immediate resignation. The Royal Court will, as a consequence of the findings of our internal investigation, make an evaluation of the extended power the position of palce manager has''.

Here is an article about it from Royal Central:
Norway’s Royal Palace manager resigns following a serious breach of internal guidelines – Royal Central

The Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet has received a confirmation from the Royal Court that the internal investigation was initiated after Dagbladet last week sent a number of questions about construction work and one of the last year’s projects in the Palace Park in Oslo. It is at this point unclear which internal guidelines the palace manager broke.

Osnes has been palace manager for the Royal Family since the 90s and has played a key role in renovation the Royal Palace and other Norwegian royal properties. He is an educated architect and has his own company next to his work at the palace.

This of course got a lot of attention in the Norwegian media and overshadowed the CP couple's visit to the Baltic states last week.

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

Well, that was that. - And I hope people found it interesting, because there is more to come (from me, I mean).

It seems problematic to announce that Mr. Osnes committed a "serious breach of trust" without offering the facts, as people may present theories that his offense was worse than it was in truth.

I wonder if the parliamentary construction scandal attracted more attention to the alleged financial improprieties at the royal court.

The article below states that the palace renovation in which Osnes played a key role was controversial.

[Osnes] held a central role in the controversial and expensive upgrading of the Palace and has been involved in improvements at other royal properties.

[…]

The palace recently reported its biggest financial deficit in 10 years, blaming it on expenses of the celebrations of King Harald’s and Queen Sonja’s 80th birthdays last year and on the costs of securing royal property. Among the projects tied to the royal birthdays was the renovation and conversion of the former stables on the grounds of the palace into an art center that requires an admission fee.

Newspaper Dagens Næringsliv (DN) reported that last year’s deficit was the largest since 2007. Salary costs for the palace’s 160 employees also increased by NOK 6 million, to NOK 134 million. The palace, which has been publicly pressured to be more open about how it manages the public funding it receives, reported a loss of nearly NOK 5 million in 2016 and NOK 9.9 million in 2017.

Palace official quits under a cloud

 

[Al_bina]

... [snipped]Anyway, Norway is SO wealthy and the finances of the Royal House are modest or in line compared with other monarchies: it surprises me that money seems such an issue in Norway....

Norway is a well-to-do country at the moment. However, Norway's oil and gas fields are said to be at their peak. Perhaps the government decided to start saving for a rainy day.

 

[Somebody]

Working both for the Royal Family and keeping your own company in itself seems a risk.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Thanks, Tatiana Maria, for your always interesting responses!

And I'm sorry that I have not replied to this until now, but better late than never, I suppose.

Palace official quits under a cloud

As one can see from many threads here, I'm not afraid to criticize the royals, and I admire journalists who manages to be balanced.
But Nina Berglund, who wrote that ''News in English'' article, is an ardent republican, and many of her articles are biased and full of factual errors.

About her: Well, she has full control of the ''News in English'' website, and has never written an article in Norwegian, which means that 99.9% of the population in Norway doesn't know who she is at all (lucky them).

Information about her - from her own site: About us - News in English

Nina Berglund grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area and graduated from the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University, near Chicago. She worked for the Tucson Citizen in Arizona, the Oakland Tribune in California and was on the start-up team for USA TODAY in Washington DC before joining the statewide morning daily in Hawaii, the Honolulu Advertiser. She also was a reporter and business news anchor for the ABC-TV affiliate in Honolulu, KITV, before moving to Oslo in 1989. After studying Norwegian at the University of Oslo, she spent eight years as deputy editor of the Oslo-based international shipping newspaper TradeWinds, put out by the owners of financial daily Dagens Næringsliv, before joining the online edition of Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten in 1999. When not writing or editing, she spends as much time as possible hiking and skiing in the hills around Oslo.

From an interview with her in 2012:
Sons of Norway Blog: Viking Chats With Journalist Nina Berglund

''I was hired by newspaper Aftenposten in 1999 to work on its then-new website. I helped build up an English news service for aftenposten.no, but Aftenposten unfortunately shut it down in 2008 to cut costs when the media crisis first hit. I launched "Views and News from Norway" on my own in an effort to carry on where Aftenposten left off.''

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

But enough about her, now to the royal finances:

I wonder if the parliamentary construction scandal attracted more attention to the alleged financial improprieties at the royal court.

The parliamentary construction scandal (regarding the Storting building) wasn't yet a ''scandal'' when Dagbladet started their ridiculous investigation of royal finances in April 2016.

The article below states that the palace renovation in which Osnes played a key role was controversial.

The ''controversial and expensive'' palace renovation that Nina Berglund refers to, took place in the 1990s, under the leadership of Osnes.

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

From Nina Berglund's ''News in English'' article:

The palace recently reported its biggest financial deficit in 10 years, blaming it on expenses of the celebrations of King Harald’s and Queen Sonja’s 80th birthdays last year and on the costs of securing royal property. Among the projects tied to the royal birthdays was the renovation and conversion of the former stables on the grounds of the palace into an art center that requires an admission fee.

''Blaming''? What the heck is she talking about?

As TV2's royal expert Kjell Arne Totland said live on TV2 News Channel, the deficit was actually planned due to the 80th birthday celebrations and securing of royal property (so the court wasn't ''blaming'' it on anything).

Annual Accounts 2017: Annual Reports - The Royal House of Norway

The financial results for the year are better than anticipated, and are covered by accumulated reserves. The accounts for the Civil List, which also includes the official activities of the Crown Prince and Crown Princess, show a deficit of NOK 9 879 056.

For the regular allocation (item 50), the accounts show a deficit of NOK 3 152 352, which is the result of the various activities in connection with the birthday celebrations for the King and Queen. This deficit is debited to previous appropriations set aside for this purpose. The accounts show that a major portion of the allocated funding was used for the maintenance and development of the Royal Palace and other buildings.

The remaining deficit of NOK 6 726 705 is the result of the launch of measures and investments in connection with the Royal Court’s security project. This deficit is covered by previous appropriations for the implementation of the security project for the Royal Residences.

The accounts for “Åpent Slott” (cultural outreach activities) show a surplus of NOK 2 390 033. This surplus will be used for activities under the auspices of “Åpent Slott”.

The annual report and accounts of the Royal Court for 2017 were submitted to the Presidium of the Storting, the Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation, and the Office of the Auditor General of Norway.

More from Nina Berglund's article:

Newspaper Dagens Næringsliv (DN) reported that last year’s deficit was the largest since 2007. Salary costs for the palace’s 160 employees also increased by NOK 6 million, to NOK 134 million. The palace, which has been publicly pressured to be more open about how it manages the public funding it receives, reported a loss of nearly NOK 5 million in 2016 and NOK 9.9 million in 2017.

Well, did she make a mistake, or did she lie (again)?

Annual Accounts 2016: Annual Reports - The Royal House of Norway

The accounts for the Civil List showed a surplus of NOK 6 628 814. Expenses in connection with the various jubilee celebrations are covered by previous appropriations.

The accounts for the staff of Their Royal Highnesses The Crown Prince and The Crown Princess showed a deficit of NOK 1 459 461. This deficit will be covered by previous appropriations.

The accounts for “Åpent Slott” showed a surplus of NOK 619 162. This surplus will be added to the equity capital.

The annual report and accounts of the Royal Court for 2016 were submitted today to the Presidium of the Storting, the Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation, and the Office of the Auditor General of Norway.

And here is the Dagens Næringsliv article that she referred to:
Millionunderskudd etter kongelig bursdagsfest - Dagens Næringsliv - translation

2017:
Turnover: 226,5 million (NOK).
Operating profit: 10,4 million (NOK) in deficit.
Profit before tax: 9,8 million (NOK) in deficit.

2016:
Turnover: 192,9 million (NOK).
Operating profit: 5,9 million (NOK) in surplus.
Profit before tax: 6,6 million (NOK) in surplus.

So again, what is that woman talking about????

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

Norway is a well-to-do country at the moment. However, Norway's oil and gas fields are said to be at their peak. Perhaps the government decided to start saving for a rainy day.

What?? The ''government'' hasn't decided anything.
And this country has plenty of other resources, so we will have more than enough money to fund the monarchy, also in the future.

 

[Al_bina]

... [snipped]
What?? The ''government'' hasn't decided anything.
And this country has plenty of other resources, so we will have more than enough money to fund the monarchy, also in the future.

One can find your response emotional.

Saving money for a rainy day is different from defunding the Norwegian monarchy. The famous oil fund is a cornerstone of the Norwegian prosperity. It remains to be seen what will happen after the fund in question is spent. At the same time, Norway can sell "plenty of other resources" it has to fund its monarchy.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Duc_et_Pair wrote:

Norway is SO wealthy and the finances of the Royal House are modest or in line compared with other monarchies: it surprises me that money seems such an issue in Norway....

Then you responded with this:

Norway is a well-to-do country at the moment. However, Norway's oil and gas fields are said to be at their peak. Perhaps the government decided to start saving for a rainy day.

Well, I still don't understand what you were talking about.

Two points:
1. As I wrote in post 9 (as a response to Duc_et_Pair), the financing of the monarchy is an issue for Dagbladet, not other media outlets or the Norwegian public.
2. The government hasn't decided to start saving for a rainy day, they have in fact increased both the Civil List (the money received by the court) and the apanage (the money received by the Regent/CP couples).

And then to your last response:
1. Well, I don't understand that either, but that's OK.
2. Perhaps you should do some more research on the economic situation in Norway before you start discussing with a Norwegian about it.
3. But you and me come from two completely different cultures, and it is therefore unlikely that we will agree on anything, anyway.

 

[Al_bina]

... [snipped]
Two points:
1. As I wrote in post 9 (as a response to Duc_et_Pair), the financing of the monarchy is an issue for Dagbladet, not other media outlets or the Norwegian public.
2. The government hasn't decided to start saving for a rainy day, they have in fact increased both the Civil List (the money received by the court) and the apanage (the money received by the Regent/CP couples).

And then to your last response:
1. Well, I don't understand that either, but that's OK.
2. Perhaps you should do some more research on the economic situation in Norway before you start discussing with a Norwegian about it.
3. But you and me come from two completely different cultures, and it is therefore unlikely that we will agree on anything, anyway.

I did not discuss the economic issues of Norway with you. The comment was made on Duc_ et_Pair's post. You are entitled to your opinion. Norway has a right to do whatever it wants. That is all.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Well, stuff have happened in the Royal Court in recent months, so I've written some posts about it. - Here's one of them:

The Royal Court's widely criticised Communications Director Marianne Hagen (in that position since 2008) was appointed by the Prime Minister to become State Secretary (a role in the government) on November 10th.

Why was Marianne Hagen so criticised by commentators and the so-called experts?
1. She was arrogant, uncooperative and bad at dealing with the media.
2. She held various positions in the Conservative Party from 1987 to 1991.
3. Nor did it help her to have a close friendship with Jan Tore Sanner, Minister of Local Government and Modernisation (for the Conservative Party) from 2013 to 2018, especially since this ministerial post is responsible for the financing of the monarchy.
4. She was also a friend of the CP couple (one of Haakon's few friends belonging to another party than Labour).

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

She was temporary replaced by Ole Edvard Wold-Reitan (an even closer personal friend of the CP couple) who then become acting Communications Director.

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

The court announced on April 27th that Guri Ofstad Varpe is employed as the new Communications Director:
Ny kommunikasjonssjef - kongehuset.no

Guri Ofstad Varpe, 46, is employed as Head of Communication at the Royal Court, and will start in the position on June 1, 2018. She has 20 years of experience in communications, organizational life, private business, political activity, and the media industry.

Guri Ofstad Varpe comes from the position of director of Burson-Marsteller - where she has led the agency's media department since 2013 and been part of the management team.

Guri Ofstad Varpe has experience from both communication counseling, journalism and politics. She has previously worked as a journalist in TV2 and information manager in the The Employers Association Spekter. During the period 1997-99, she was employed by the Socialist Left Party (yes, the Left-winged pary who wants Norway to become a republic).

Guri Ofstad Varpe is educated Cand Mag (an academic degree) with the subjects of history and comparable politics from the University of Bergen. Varpe grew up in Ålesund and Bodø, and is now living in Oslo.

"I look forward to starting in this very important and interesting job," says Guri Ofstad Varpe.

Well, hopefully she will be able to give the CP couple some good advice (we are allowed to hope, aren't we?).

 

[fortimo]

The CP family is looking for cleaning staff:

https://www.gala.de/royals/skandina...marit--sie-sucht-eine-putzfrau--21762182.html
https://translate.google.com/transl...sucht-eine-putzfrau--21762182.html&edit-text=

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Thanks fortimo!

And since the advertisement has now been removed from the royal website, we must assume they found the people they were looking for.

Anyway, the court is now searching for a senior communications adviser.
Hmm, perhaps the new Communications Director, Guri Ofstad Varpe (whom one can read about in post 17) needed some assistance to handle the CP couple, Marius and the 'Daggbladet nonsencee' (as I like to call it).

Vi søker dyktig senior kommunikasjonsrådgiver - kongehuset.no - translation

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

Here are some news from April:

The court announced on April 4th, that they are changing their guidelines following the MeToo campaign:
Norwegian Royal Court changes their guidelines following #MeToo campaign – Royal Central

The Norwegian Royal Court has introduced new ethical guidelines for its employees following the #MeToo campaign. The new ethical guidelines give zero tolerance for sexual harassment, bullying and discrimination among the staff of the Norwegian royal household. This was announced by the Royal Court in their annual report which was published by the Court yesterday.

The Court had started to rework their ethical guidelines before the #MeToo campaign last autumn but went through their routines once again as a result of the campaign explained the Assistant Communications Manager at the Royal Palace to the Norwegian television channel NRK yesterday. “Like most other businesses, we also conducted a review of our routines to make sure that we as an organisation have zero tolerance for sexual harassment,” said the Assistant Communications Manager to NRK.

The Assistant Communications Manager also said, that there has not been any sexual harassment reported from any member of the court.

Here is the original article from NRK - with google translation:
Kongen tar #metoo-grep - NRK - translation

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

There are some issues with the google translations again, so in the meantime, use your own.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Anyway, the court is now searching for a senior communications adviser.
Hmm, perhaps the new Communications Director, Guri Ofstad Varpe (whom one can read about in post 17) needed some assistance to handle the CP couple, Marius and the 'Daggbladet nonsencee' (as I like to call it).

Vi søker dyktig senior kommunikasjonsrådgiver - kongehuset.no - translation

Interesting. Perhaps it is also a precaution as all three of the crown prince couple's children become older and attract more interest from the press.

Here are some news from April:

The court announced on April 4th, that they are changing their guidelines following the MeToo campaign:
Norwegian Royal Court changes their guidelines following #MeToo campaign – Royal Central

The Assistant Communications Manager also said, that there has not been any sexual harassment reported from any member of the court.

Here is the original article from NRK - with google translation:
Kongen tar #metoo-grep - NRK - translation

Quoting the Royal Central article:

The Court has also prepared a guide for the use of social media. The guidelines will make employees aware of what they write, like or share on social media, and warn against commenting in a way that damages the interests of the Royal Court as well as the Royal Family.

Is the inference that their employees will be banned from being critical of the Royal Family?

 

[Somebody]

Is the inference that their employees will be banned from being critical of the Royal Family?

For social media uses it seems. That makes sense to me; why would the Royal Family allow their employees to use their inside knowledge to criticize them publicly on social media?!

 

[Muhler]

It's more a guideline about not accidentally moaning about something at work (Say Haakon's shoes...) on social media, because once posted there is a risk it will end up in the wrong hands and be blown out of proportions.

If Norway is anything like DK (We'll see what Royal Norway has to say) the employees will all, without exception, have to sign a pledge about now revealing confidential information (including details about the NRF's private life) without an OK from the court.
Breaching that is a criminal offense.

Signing such a pledge is very common for anyone who have access to sensitive information about other people. Even on a cleaner-level.
I've signed several in my life.

There is also a clause about disloyalty against your workplace. That's applicable for practically every single employee.
Unless there are very good reasons you are not to talk in a derogatory manner about your workplace. That's grounds for being sacked or fined if you have left the workplace, on grounds of disloyalty.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Interesting. Perhaps it is also a precaution as all three of the crown prince couple's children become older and attract more interest from the press.

That can also be one of the reasons, yes.

And as I wrote in the ''Marius Borg Høiby'' thread earlier this year: The CP couple (especially MM) will probably go COMPLETELY CRAZY when the media starts to write about Ingrid and Sverre. - Because that is likely to be very hard for the Crown Princess, and here she can't use the ''private person'' thing to defend/protect them (as she does with Marius).
So I think she will need all the help/guidance she can get to prepare herself for it.

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

Quoting the Royal Central article:

The Court has also prepared a guide for the use of social media. The guidelines will make employees aware of what they write, like or share on social media, and warn against commenting in a way that damages the interests of the Royal Court as well as the Royal Family.

Is the inference that their employees will be banned from being critical of the Royal Family?

Well, that's not how I read it.
As you can see from the quote, the court's new guidelines will make employees aware of what they write, like or share on social media, and warn against commenting in a way that damages the interests of the Royal Court as well as the Royal Family.
What does that mean? Well, AMO, it means that the court doesn't want their employees to write, like or share something that can affect badly on the King, the royal family and the royal court.
Here's an example: If a court employee write, like or share something sexually harassing about another person, then it will affect badly on the King, the royal family and the royal court in form of bad press (even though the royals themselves hasn't done anything wrong).

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

If Norway is anything like DK (We'll see what Royal Norway has to say) the employees will all, without exception, have to sign a pledge about now revealing confidential information (including details about the NRF's private life) without an OK from the court.
Breaching that is a criminal offense.

That's completely right Muhler!
In Norway, every court employee must sign a confidentiality contract for life.
Breaching that is indeed a criminal offense.
But that hasn't stopped them from leaking stuff to the press. The last time that happened was when a court employee (believed to be a butler) wrote a letter to Dagbladet in March 2017. - Dagbladet know his/her identity, but they published the letter anonymously to protect their source.

To those of you who have't read this thread, Dagbladet is a Republican tabloid newspaper, which you can read about in the previous posts here.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

As LadyFinn wrote in the thread below, Märtha has decided to sell Bloksberg (her holiday retreat at Hankø Island in Østfold county, south east in Norway).
Price: 35 million NOK, but she'll probably get more than that: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f228/bloksberg-hank-37353.html#post2142052

And this, of course, has led to much criticism in ''egalitarian'' Norway.

Mathias Fischer (Political commentator in the republican, liberal local-newspaper, Bergens Tidende from 2014 to 2018 and from next month at TV2) wrote the following on twitter:

Mathias Fischer @mathiasfischer
Bloksberg ble kjøpt av kong Olav i 1947, den ble arvet av kong Harald, og så av prinsesse Märtha Louise. Nå skal hun selge hytten ut av familien for mange titalls millioner fordi hun ikke klarer å tjene nok penger på englesvindelen. Pinlig.

Translated to: ''Bloksberg was purchased by King Olav in 1947, it was inherited by King Harald, and so by Princess Märtha Louise. Now she will sell the property out of the family for tens of millions because she can't make enough money on the angel-fraud. Embarrassing.''

Angel-fraud? Well, he's not the first commentator to say that (and then I include those who are pro-monarchy), but how can it be fraud, when she's not doing anything illegal? Hmm??????????
Or did he just write it to get some attention? I know what my answer is, but you'll have to judge for yourselves.

About Fischer: A 25 year-old republican, but IMO a serious commentator, who (despite his young age) is seen by many in the media as an important voice.
Active in the republican, centred Liberal Party (which has been part of the government since January 2018), but renounced his membership when he started at Bergens Tidende.

And Per Olaf Lundteigen (a highly respected pro-monarchy MP for the pro-monarchy, centred Centre Party from 1993 to 1997 and from 2005-present, and spokesman for the party on royal issues from 2013 to 2017) said that Märtha selling Bloksberg to the highest bidder may weaken the reputation of the monarchy, and that the government therefore should try to reach an agreement with her to buy the property and use it for representation.

But it's not just commentators and politicians who have something to say about this. - Because according to VG (pro-monarchy tabloid newspaper), several readers have contacted them by e-mail and telephone and asked whether the princess can sell something that was bought by the Royal House, and where funds from the taxpayers may have been invested.

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

Some facts:
1. The property was purchased by CP Olav for private money, which he inherited from his mother, Queen Maud.
2. Märtha does not have enough income to sit on such a property, and the King doesn't have enough cash to help her (his private fortune of around 100 million NOK is, according to the court, placed in two crisis fund to keep the NRF independent from the government if a war or something like that should occur). And the court has repeatedly had to spend money from its state grants (the Civil List) to maintain the property, which has been heavily criticized by the republican tabloid newspaper Dagbladet, but no politicians have so far demanded that Märtha should pay back anything after the sale.
3. The property has been refurbished several times, and has (according to experts on this field) no significant cultural historical value.

So then I ask: What the heck is wrong with her selling it?

 

[An Ard Ri]

Was the holiday Villa used much? If not I don't see the problem in selling it off.

 

[Muhler]

There is nothing wrong with her selling the property. In fact it's PR-wise better now that just a couple of years ago. - With the financial crisis in mind.

I think such criticism is to be expected. No matter what there will always be some who, for various reasons, will have a go at the royals for making sound economic dispositions.
And other will basically demand that everything the royals earn, should go back to the taxpayers, - regardless of that being private property, private income, presents and private investments.

If Märtha is not using the place and it's too expensive for her to maintain it, it's a wise economic move.

Anyway, it all depends on what the man on the street says. And I imagine most will be pretty indifferent.
It's not like she's selling a palace and pocketing the profit, is it?

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

I was about to respond to this yesterday evening, but got caught up in something else. ?

BTW: My ''what the heck is wrong with her selling it?'' question was meant as an answer to the things I wrote about in the post, because I couldn't be more sure of what I mean about it. - Which is: Get it sold as quickly as possible, it should in fact have been done several years ago, because then we had been spared of ''angry'' commentators in Dagbladet and pro-monarchy MPs who spent the last months of 2016 complaining that the court had to pay for a half-finished swimming pool and other maintenance of the property, etc, etc.

The republican MPs OTOH, mostly keep their mouths shut on stuff like this.

Was the holiday Villa used much? If not I don't see the problem in selling it off.

Yes, she has used it every year, most recently a few days ago, when she wrote this on instagram.
And her second daughter, Leah Isadora, was even born there in 2005.

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

There is nothing wrong with her selling the property. In fact it's PR-wise better now that just a couple of years ago. - With the financial crisis in mind.

I think such criticism is to be expected. No matter what there will always be some who, for various reasons, will have a go at the royals for making sound economic dispositions.
And other will basically demand that everything the royals earn, should go back to the taxpayers, - regardless of that being private property, private income, presents and private investments.

If Märtha is not using the place and it's too expensive for her to maintain it, it's a wise economic move.

Anyway, it all depends on what the man on the street says. And I imagine most will be pretty indifferent.
It's not like she's selling a palace and pocketing the profit, is it?

Well, as usual a great reply!

PR-wise. I.e. what ordinary people would have thought then and now: Fully agree!
Although I think most people, not that they are sitting at home thinking about it, was always going to have a problem with a PRINCESS getting 35 to 45 millions in the bank. - That's just Norwegians being Norwegians (petty as we are).
And it dosen't get better when it comes from a property that the court has spent a lot of money on maintaining.

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

And perhaps we should write a bit about why politicians, commentators, newspapers and even TV-stations are more ongoing in the way they cover this sale today than they would've done just a few years ago:

Prior to her launching the Angel School in 2007, Märtha could IMO easily have sold Bloksberg (almost) without being criticised by the politicians/media at all.
Why? Well, despite the criticism she received for marrying Ari, she was still pretty popular, and the MPs in the Storting (with the excetion of those from the republican Socialist Left Party) & the press (with the exception of Dagbladet) were almost unanimously pro-monarchy.

And untill 2013 (even during the 2007/2008 financial crisis), she could also easily have sold it without too much attention/criticism, I think.
Why? Because it was before the CP Couple made some of their most controversial mistakes, which turned the media against them, and with that, several politicians, newspapers and commentators decided to go republican. - Which again led to a much rougher coverage of the monarchy and its finances.

Well, this was it.

Because now it's time to prepare to go Golden Wedding Anniversary crazy.

 

[Muhler]

Interesting.

So it has become politically safe, perhaps even politically fashionable, to be critical of at least the younger members of the NRF?

Could that be part of the explanation for politicians being critical of this, pretty trivial economic disposition?
Keeping in mind of course that politicians crave "air time" and as such comment on everything and anything...

 

[tommy100]

I guess I can understand part of the thinks people may say if the state has indeed paid for work at the house since Martha has owned it. But then again if it was from the Court funds and that is how the King funds his family etc anyway then why not? Its a shame to have to sell a property that has been in the family for a while but needs must sometimes.

I don't think it is an issue at all but I can see why some people may not be happy but then some people are never happy!

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Interesting.

So it has become politically safe, perhaps even politically fashionable, to be critical of at least the younger members of the NRF?

Could that be part of the explanation for politicians being critical of this, pretty trivial economic disposition?
Keeping in mind of course that politicians crave "air time" and as such comment on everything and anything...

Well, at least when somethings happens. I.e. when the CP Couple took the children out of the public school in 2014, when they went on that yacht-trip in 2015 - and when Dagbladet came up with that article-series of theirs (named kongemakta/royal pover) about the financing of the court and the private finances of the royals (which I know you've taken a look at).

And you know, it is pretty fashionable to be critical of a princess who runs an angel school and who talks with dead people. - And a CP Couple who are friends with Labour politicians (which makes politicians from other parties pretty pissed) and who repeatedly breaks with Norwegian egalitarian norms.

For those who are not into this, read about it in these threads, from when I discussed political criticism of Haakon/MM with Muhler earlier this month:

General News & Information for King Harald V and Queen Sonja

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...te-marit-and-family-37189-14.html#post2140912

And for those who are not into that article-series from Dagbladet, go back and read about it in the first post in this thread.

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

I guess I can understand part of the thinks people may say if the state has indeed paid for work at the house since Martha has owned it. But then again if it was from the Court funds and that is how the King funds his family etc anyway then why not? Its a shame to have to sell a property that has been in the family for a while but needs must sometimes.

I don't think it is an issue at all but I can see why some people may not be happy but then some people are never happy!

Well, after the financing of the monarchy was changed in 2001/2002 (following the recommendation of the Royal Court, the Storting and the Government), the court's state funds (the Civil List) become separated from the apanages received by the Regent/CP Couples. - And it was then decided that the royals had to cover the refurbishment of private properties, while the court covered those owned by the state.

But Dagbladet ''discovered'' in 2016 that the court had paid people to do maintenance-work on the private properties as well - and this led to an enormous amount of criticism from the media.
It was later discovered that all governments since 2001 had known about it, which also led to criticism towards the politicians. Well, even we ordinary folks knew about it, because it had been mentioned before, so not a big revelation.

The politicians responsible for royal funding in the Storting then said that it's not the funding who is the problem, and that they would ''gladly increase the apanages, but that the principle that the court's money shouldn't be used on private properties must be continued''.
These politicians were critical of how the court handled this so-called crisis, but after the same politicians were invited to a meeting with the Lord Chamberlain in April 2017, they said that ''the court should in some cases cover some of the royal family's private expenses.''

With that they meant on properties owned by members of the Royal House, such as:

Skaugum. - Why?
Because it serves as the CP Couple's official residence.

Kongsseteren. - Why?
1. Because the property is of significant cultural historical value.
2. Because the King's apanage isn't large enough to cover it, and his entire fortune is placed in two crisis fund (read why in post 24).