Popularity of the Monarchy Luxembourg

[RoyaltyPortuguese]

News and information about the popularity and the future of the monarchy of Luxembourg.

 

[Blog Real]

How is the popularity of the monarchy in Luxembourg?

 

[Blog Real]

https://www.luxprivat.lu/news/detail/das-ende-der-luxemburger-monarchie.html

 

[Lee-Z]

doesn't sound good, but can i just ask what type of publication this is? Gossip? High quality?

 

[Blog Real]

Luxemburger Wort - Monarchie oder Republik

70% of the Luxembourgers are in favour of keeping the monarchy.

 

[Blog Real]

doesn't sound good, but can i just ask what type of publication this is? Gossip? High quality?

I don't think it's a serious publication. But someone here knows this publication?

 

[tommy100]

I'm not an expert but from what I have seen on this forum and others LuxPrivat doesn't seem to count as a trustworthy news source, more instead a gossipy magazine that, it seems, makes up lots of stories. Over the years I've noticed a number of stories which are simply factually wrong. I wouldn't put much, if any, trust in its articles.
Instead Luxemburger Wort is a much more factual, trustworthy source based on facts and real news and not gossip or make believe.

 

[melina premiere]

Privat is a tabloid, I think

 

[Prisma]

"A petition calling for the establishment of a Republic in Luxembourg will soon be opened for signature on the website of the Chamber of Deputies. Met on Monday, the committee has validated the proposal filed by a resident of the country. It wants to hold a "referendum" in the context of the constitutional review in progress.
[...]
Petition No. 703, should be open to signatures in a few days after the approval of the Conference of Presidents." (partial Google translation)

More: L'essentiel Online - Et si le Luxembourg devenait une République? - Luxembourg

 

[Blog Real]

This is a petition but I doubt that this go forward. The Kingdom of Luxembourg is very popular and people like the Grand Ducal Family. The monarchy is the image of Luxembourg. Long live the monarchy.


Yes the Grand Duke Henri and Grand Duchess Maria Teresa are popular, it is a fact. And from what I read on the internet about this subject, people continue to prefer the monarchy to Republic in Luxembourg, so I think the monarchy is safe in this country.

Petition calls for referendum on scrapping Luxembourg monarchy
Luxemburger Wort - Petition calls for referendum on scrapping Luxembourg monarchy

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

This is a petition but I doubt that this go forward. The Kingdom of Luxembourg is very popular and people like the Grand Ducal Family. The monarchy is the image of Luxembourg. Long live the monarchy.

How do you know the grand-ducal family is 'popular'?

Besides that: popularity does not mean that people embrace a form of state in which the head of state is delivered by hereditary succession. I think the personal popularity of the Benelux monarchs Philippe & Mathilde, Willem-Alexander & Máxima and Henri & María Teresa is great but that is not the question which is asked. The question is if the citizens support a continuation of the present form of state, yes or no.

I would not put my hand in the fire for a 'secure result' of such a referendum. In all three the Benelux monarchies the status-quo is just as it is: "It has always been as it is". But no one was ever asked. When people really can answer in all honesty, in the privacy of the polling station, I would not be so sure about the outcome.

Such referendums also have a domino-effect: when Luxembourg succeeds to hold a referendum, Belgium and Spain -with strong separatist movements- will press for a referendum too. The Netherlands for so far only has corrective recerendums. There needs to be an Act to hold a referendum about: when a Parliament has approved an Act, the people can eventually "correct it". Until now it is not possible to hold a referendum when a topic is not in procedure in the States-General (Parliament). That is a hindrance for people wanting to question the monarchy, but I think the Dutch monarchy has a chance to fall indeed, despite the great personal popularity of several royals.

The often made wrong conclusion on these boards is that personal popularity = support for the form of state on base of hereditary succession. That conclusion is not correct. It is not one on one.

In Romania former King Michael has approval ratings any politician can only dream about. But there is no majority for the restoration of the monarchy, which proves that a personal popularity does not mean the form of state is popular too.

For an example: I am a conservative dude. Can a monarchy count on my support? Hmmm... I am not so sure. The so-called royal families have become more and more like any ordinary family, which brings the question forward: why vote for them? Just make a republic, then I can elect my own commoner as head of state. Fair enough.

 

[lucien]

Petition calls for referendum on scrapping Luxembourg monarchy
Luxemburger Wort - Petition calls for referendum on scrapping Luxembourg monarchy

Couleur locale,or better it's cucumbertime in media and bananaland!
It will ride with wear.

 

[Michiru-Kaiou]

Just make a republic, then I can elect my own commoner as head of state. Fair enough.

Or not. We (Germany) are a republic and I still don't get to have a say in who will be our head-of-state. We get him (or her, if it comes to it someday) dumped on our heads if we want him or not. And at one time we had five former Presidents who enjoyed their retirement (one of them is in his fifties and was in office for not even full two years) and are/ were paid quite generously by the state. And our President has about the same amount of political power as any European monarch. Our system can really disillusion you when it comes to republics.

best wishes Michiru

 

[Stefan]

And at one time we had five former Presidents who enjoyed their retirement (one of them is in his fifties and was in office for not even full two years) and are/ were paid quite generously by the state. And our President has about the same amount of political power as any European monarch. Our system can really disillusion you when it comes to republics.

best wishes Michiru

And recently our former president Walter Scheel died 37 years after having left office. For all this years he (like all former Presidents) still got money from the State and usualy the get an office provided by the State with Secretary, Referent and Office-director. And a Car with chaffeur.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Or not. We (Germany) are a republic and I still don't get to have a say in who will be our head-of-state. We get him (or her, if it comes to it someday) dumped on our heads if we want him or not. And at one time we had five former Presidents who enjoyed their retirement (one of them is in his fifties and was in office for not even full two years) and are/ were paid quite generously by the state. And our President has about the same amount of political power as any European monarch. Our system can really disillusion you when it comes to republics.

best wishes Michiru

Of course Germans have a choice. The Bundespräsident is elected by a giant forum consisting of the Bundestag and the parliaments of all the German states. Yes, neither Joachim Gauck nor Richard von Weiszäcker had to campaign and were selected after being nominated by their parties. But in the end it were the representants of all Germans, in the federation and in the different states, making a vote for the Bundespräsident.

Even Obama has never been elected by the US people. The people of the different states vote for representants in an electoral college per state and they elect the President. I think Germany is actually a great example of a honourable citizen being elected and representing the state with great style in that splendid Schloss Bellevue.

When it comes to that argument, the Grand-Duke will always loose because at least the Bundespräsident has a (indirect) democratic mandate, which he -per definition- does not have. We have sern with the Brexit, the Scottish independence, Catalonia, the various EU treaties, etc. that there is no secure outcome. In my personal opinion the three Benelux monarchs have wobbly thrones. Note that a monarchy which wins the referendum with a narrow margin also is in danger. The monarchs themselves always speak about "being born by the people" but when the support is 51-49% then that victory will be a Pyrrhus victory.

Note that the Luxembourgers are (almost) outnumbered by immigrants who do not have that emotional attachment to the grand-ducal family. When your roots are in republican Portugal where they have kicked the King out and you were formed in a republican state, it is not sure that they will vote for maintaining a monarchy.

 

[Marengo]

Are foreign nationals allowed to vote in a referendum? Of course the Portuguese must be the 2nd or 3rd generation by now, so it is likely most are Luxembourg nationals. I do not know how people from immigrant backgrounds regard the monarchy in Luxembourg. In my own country the monarchy is especially well regarded by immigrants.

Referendums in Luxembourg are non-binding AFAIK (as they are in the UK). I find referendums in general problematic in parlementary democracies as it means mob-rule, ignoring parlement -which is elected to represent the will of the people- and thus is thoroughly undemocratic. It is a favourite tool used by dictators and demagogues.

Another problem with a referendum is that it usually attracts people to the voting booth that want to vote 'no' against the system and are disgruntled for many reasons, not perse the monarchy. The results are not neseccarily a reflection of the will of the people either. The amount of signatures needed for such a referendum is usually set far too low, as in these days of internat petitions you can find a high number of signatures rather easily. Another other problem is that there is a clear system on one hand (present monarchy) and something unclear on the other hand: a president, but what powers, what costs, how will he/she be elected, what will be the costs of changing the system? People will project their hopes and wishes on the unknown, while in reality a republic is likely to be more costly for starters.

I agree with the possible domino-effect of such a referendum. Dark forces in at least the rest of the Benelux will probably seek a simular referendum. These days 40% of the voters seem continuously disaffected with any kind of authority and 'power', which is worrysome indeed. Although I am confident that in The Netherlands the monarchy is stable enough to overcome such a referendum, these discussions are never good for the institution. The last thing Europe needs right now is more unstabily, considering all the more pressing matters that are going on already.

 

[Michiru-Kaiou]

And recently our former president Walter Scheel died 37 years after having left office. For all this years he (like all former Presidents) still got money from the State and usualy the get an office provided by the State with Secretary, Referent and Office-director. And a Car with chaffeur.

Yeah. And going by the young age of Christian Wulff (and yep, I do wish him a long life) this could easily be surpassed.

Of course Germans have a choice. The Bundespräsident is elected by a giant forum consisting of the Bundestag and the parliaments of all the German states. Yes, neither Joachim Gauck nor Richard von Weiszäcker had to campaign and were selected after being nominated by their parties. But in the end it were the representants of all Germans, in the federation and in the different states, making a vote for the Bundespräsident.

Do you really think, that any German voter has the Federal President in mind when s/he casts his/ her vote in the Bundestag or Landtag elections? Surveys in quite a few elections suggested, that the candidate, that happened to have the best chances in the Bundesversammlung wouldn't gain a majority if elected directly. Latest examples were Joachim Gauck himself and Gesine Schwan, who both would have most likely won over their opponents in a direct vote. Not Horst Köhler, or Christian Wulff.

Even Obama has never been elected by the US people. The people of the different states vote for representants in an electoral college per state and they elect the President.

Correct me, if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, the electors are bound to vote for the candidate they were elected to elect in at least the first round.

I think Germany is actually a great example of a honourable citizen being elected and representing the state with great style in that splendid Schloss Bellevue.

You have a higher opinion of our Presidential system than many Germans. I'd love to say a lot about Wulff, but I guess that'd stretch the "no politics" rule of this forum too far. And it wouldn't add anything to the "why abandoning monarchy is a bad idea" discussion on this thread.

When it comes to that argument, the Grand-Duke will always loose because at least the Bundespräsident has a (indirect) democratic mandate, which he -per definition- does not have.

I still remember the one time Horst Köhler refused to sign a law. The ruckus he caused with that decision was phenomenal with not few politicians questioning whether he even had the right to refuse the decision made by the Bundestag and Bundesrat.

Another problem with a referendum is that it usually attracts people to the voting booth that want to vote 'no' against the system and are disgruntled for many reasons, not perse the monarchy.

This. I still think many Brexit voters woke up the next morning and thought: "Oops, that's not what I wanted."

Well, another reason why I'd really recommend Luxembourg to stick with what they have is, that it at least brings about stability. In a monarchy you know what you have and what comes afterward. Republics don't have that luxury. And monarchies have heads-of-state who are supposed to be neutral and unifying. Something you cannot really say about republics. Even in our system, where the Federal President is supposed to be neutral, too, you will always know where he came from.

best wishes Michiru

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

That is why I hope and pray that the petition in Luxembourg will not attract enough signatures: for the domino effect. "Hey... if they can so progressive in that sleepy grand-duchy to hold a referendum, why deny the Dutch or the Belgians a say about their form of state?"

That a referendum is "advisory" means nothing. The latest "advisory referendum" in the Netherlands (on the EU Association Treaty with Ukraine) only attracted 32% of the voters but all parties in Parliament promised "to respect the outcome" of that referendum. So "advisory" is only in name, it will always be pretty decisive.

I also object against petitioning via one mouse-click. In some countries there is a digital entrance to the Government. You have to log in with an account to do your tax assessment, to manage your health service, to communicate with the municipality, etc. If people petition via that specific digital entrance, okay... But just going to a website: "Away with the monarchy: sign here!" and then present 40.000 internet signatures to enfore a referendum...

 

[Moonmaiden23]

The people of the US do not directly elect the President, it's true Duc. But their electors from the Electoral College determine who to cast their electoral ballots based on whom the people of those respective states have voted for.

And all States are not created equal in the College. To be quite blunt for example, California, New York, Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania carry more Electoral clout than Montana or Alaska. So who the people of those states vote for determine who their Electors cast their ballots for.

In a roundabout way the people of the US ultimately do indeed elect the President of the US.

Except for in 2000, which is a subject we will agree not to delve into.

 

[BeatrixFan]

This seems to be a problem with this new idea of online petitions being significant enough to warrant either a referendum or parliamentary time. In the UK, the suggestions for various petitions range from the emotional to the downright loopy but very few actually ever get debated. I imagine that it's a numbers issue, Luxembourg doesn't have a very large population and so maybe the barrier for when such a petition becomes a topic for debate or a vote is set too low? Either way, it seems to me that one bored republican has managed to grab the attention of people who are just generally disaffected with the government and have signed up using the Grand Ducal family as a scapegoat.

Which can be very dangerous, as the Brexit vote here proved. Before this sort of online petition business started, the government would look at polls and assess the need for a parliamentary debate. And with the Grand Duke's approval rating being consistently high and support for the monarchy in Luxembourg being equally impressive, perhaps it would never have got a headline, let alone a serious possibility of an actual referendum being held?

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

You are coupling a personal popularity of individuals to a preferred system of state. The question is not if you like Grand Duke Henri. The question is: should Luxembourg keep the system in which the head of state is delivered by hereditary succession or not. That is a total different question. I have given the great appreciation and popularity for King Michael of Romania as an example. This does not translate in a desire to restore the monarchy in Romania. Possibly King Felipe of Spain is well-liked. That does not mean that the Spanish monarchy will survive a referendum indeed.

 

[BeatrixFan]

You are coupling a personal popularity of individuals to a preferred system of state. The question is not if you like Grand Duke Henri. The question is: should Luxembourg keep the system in which the head of state is delivered by hereditary succession or not. That is a total different question. I have given the great appreciation and popularity for King Michael of Romania as an example. This does not translate in a desire to restore the monarchy in Romania. Possibly King Felipe of Spain is well-liked. That does not mean that the Spanish monarchy will survive a referendum indeed.

Oh I agree. But let's not overlook that it does play a part. Perhaps the best example of personal popularity ensuring the continuity and stability of the monarchy would be Victoria and Edward VII. Britain came very close to being a republic because the Queen was personally disliked and regarded as selfish which brought the reputation of the whole institution into question. Yet as soon as Bertie took over and brought back a bit of flair, the monarchy was safe as houses.

So I think it does translate somewhat into how secure a monarchy is but I agree with you that it isn't enough to say Henri is popular, therefore the Luxembourgish throne is safe. But certainly you can't have one without the other, the question is, without Henri would the popularity of the whole institution be as high as it is?

 

[Katrianna]

There is a cycle that also follows whether the issue of having a monarchy or republic comes up and usually when a country's is facing a downward economy, the first issue is whether a monarchy is relevant to that country anymore. When the economy is booming, then monarchy is set aside and the government at the time can live with it. In the last several years Europe, as the rest of the world has experienced a downward trend in it's economies plus added costs due to terrorism and the massive influx of refugees which has taxed the most robust of the European countries and even Luxembourg, a wealthy little country has been touched.
Naturally the politicians and public turn to the Royal Families and question what they see as "lavish life styles" that "they're paying for." This follows on a news story a few weeks ago concerning the the amount of funds allotted to the Grand Ducal family by the Govt. and if they "deserved" the money they received. I remember that the Grand Duchess missed a couple of appearances and it was explained she had family matters to attend to when she was really boycotting the events because she was angry at the Govt. inquires. This is kind of what I recall. It'll certainly be interesting to follow.

 

[Denville]

T
Naturally the politicians and public turn to the Royal Families and question what they see as "lavish life styles" that "they're paying for." This follows on a news story a few weeks ago concerning the the amount of funds allotted to the Grand Ducal family by the Govt. and if they "deserved" the money they received. I remember that the Grand Duchess missed a couple of appearances and it was explained she had family matters to attend to when she was really boycotting the events because she was angry at the Govt. inquires. This is kind of what I recall. It'll certainly be interesting to follow.

I hope that she wasn't boycotting events becuase of such an issue.

 

[Curryong]

I would say that, glaringly obvious though it is, if a referendum on monarchy is presented in any country, it is much easier for the population to get rid of, with a good conscience, a monarch who is regarded as remote, unlikeable, arrogant or lazy. That's why personal popularity of the royal family in question, including the Consort, does come very much into the equation.

How can we say for instance that ex Queen Frederika's personal unpopularity didn't play a part in the subsequent referendums that kept her son from retaining the throne of Greece? Would Prince Henrik's actions impact on Queen Margrethe if a referendum on the monarchy had been held this year? I don't think in the latter case it would have imperilled Margrethe's throne (probably there would instead have been calls for the Crown Princely couple to ascend the throne), but we don't know, do we?

Even in Britain, if there was a referendum in which everyone had to vote, I don't know whether the monarchy would survive. This is in spite of the Queen's decades of selfless devotion to duty, but because Charles, the future King, has a great deal of personal baggage and, (among other things,) is regarded as a meddler in public affairs. So yes, popularity of monarchs and consorts does matter. It can tip the balance between retaining a throne and not having a throne at all.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

The Luxembourgers have the pleasure to be the wealthiest memberstate of the European Union. Their Budget Balance (budget deficit) is around zero or shows a little surplus. Their income tax and VAT-rates are under average (as every passant knows: shopping and tanking in the Grand-Duchy is profitable). So one could say: a heaven of serenity and stability. But exactly when things are going extremely well, people have time "to change". As so often, "change" is the magic word.

Note that in Western-Europe the biggest changes in society happened when the economy boomed. Look at Spain, enjoying a never-seen economic boom but also unrecognizeably changed in state and society. From a once so Catholic country to an almost libertarian open state where everything is possible. Look at Sweden. Is there any country not so prosperous as big, clean, safe, tranquil, beautiful and über-wealthy Sweden? No any reason to change the status-quo, one would say. Still they were the first to change it all, to throw centuries of traditions out of the window and make the Swedish Model (the most ceremonial and most un-political monarch in Europe). They were the first to change the hereditary succession. They have changed the face of the monarchy so, that it is hard to believe that proceedings in 1974 and in 2016 are actually in the same country. Why change? So rich and prosperous? Stayed out of the wreckages of WWI and WWII? Wealthy and healthy Swedes driving in their Saabs and Volvos to their countryside cottage with sauna, listening to Abba and eating from an IKEA-table? Africans fleeing in rubberboats to reach Fortress Europe see Sweden as Paradise.

Conclusion: when all goes well in a country, when people are rich, happy, carefree and the economy is booming, there is no need for a change and the monarchy is safe? I think that is a conclusion which can not be made.

 

[Denville]

I would say that, glaringly obvious though it is, if a referendum on monarchy is presented in any country, it is much easier for the population to get rid of, with a good conscience, a monarch who is regarded as remote, unlikeable, arrogant or lazy. That's why personal popularity of the royal family in question, including the Consort, does come very much into the equation.


not having a throne at all.

Of course it matters. that's why sensible royals like the queen Eliz II, are very careful to be seen as behaving well and were angry when Charles and Diana were making a big drama of their martital problems. If there is "not v. popular king " who is getting on, people may put up with him and the monarchy because he has an heir who is hard working pleasant and popular. Or people may overlook a not very wonderful consort or Royal because his/her spouse is very good at the job... but it does matter...
From what I know of Luxemburg, (Short visit there) the RF IS pretty well liked and seen as a good thing and devoted to duty

 

[maria-olivia]

Since always people of Luxembourg were devoted to the Grand Ducal Family except when they wanted to sell their late Grand Duchess Jewels at an Auction.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Since always people of Luxembourg were devoted to the Grand Ducal Family except when they wanted to sell their late Grand Duchess Jewels at an Auction.

You forgot the constitutional crisis around Henri refusing to sign the Euthanasia Bill, much to the discontent of the elected parliament and the electorate... The Luxembourg Government acted swiftly: with surprising speed and ease, and almost unanimously, Parliament approved to take away the grand-ducal consent.

Since then the Grand-Duke no longer sanctions bills. With his reckless gamble Henri achieved nothing: the Euthanasia Act is simply in force and he has lost his major prerogative.

Another example: everybody knows hoe pious Henri is. Despite his discontent, Parliament approved to take God away from Acts and Decrees: no longer "Nous, Henri, par la grace de Dieu, Grand-Duc de Luxembourg, Duc de Nassau" but a simple formula without a Christian reference.

These examples show the changing attitude towards the Grand-Duke and the monarchy.

 

[BeatrixFan]

But surely that happened with Baudouin and the abortion bill and that was years ago, yet the Belgian monarchy still stands? And when a monarch is overtly Catholic, these things will happen as society moves forward and if Henri has lost some of his power as a result, it would only be a crisis or cause for concern if no monarch before him had given up political authority in exchange for a purely ceremonial role. And look at Denmark. Sweden. Norway. It's almost totally ceremonial in these cases and yet the monarchies there are as secure as ever. There may be changing attitudes but one swallow doesn't make a summer and despite the problems and pitfalls, something tells me this petition will come to naught and Luxembourg will remain a monarchy for many years to come.