Prince Henrik Retiring from Official Duties as of January 1, 2016

[Duc_et_Pair]

A remarkable step i a monarchy where retirement was an absolute "no-go" so far! In my (oldfashioned) opinion a monarch or his/ her consort shouldn´t be able to abdicate! The Prince could have gone into "retirement" quietly, scaling down his duties more and more, only to be seen in public on official family occasions like his wife´s birthdays or jubilees, without this official announcement.
Still I think on the other hand he has been such an embarressment to the royal family quite often; so this step isn´t such a shame.

So you practically say that the arrivals of Grand-Duke Henri, Pope Franciscus, King Felipe and King Philippe was not a good idea and that Grand-Duke Jean, Pope Benedictus, King Juan Carlos and King Albert still should have clinged to their thrones, no matter how frail and vulnerable they are at the moment?

Politisk flertal: Derfor vil vi ikke skære i Prins Henriks million-ydelse | Nyheder

Here is an article about PH's apanage from TV2 news.

There is general political agreement in not reducing PH's apanage. - Which is hardly surprising as the overall expenses for the DRF remains roughly the same. For all we know they may have to pay full time nurses rather than secretaries now.

The more interesting is of course what the politicians actually say about this.
The PM, Lars Løkke, has praised PH and expressed his best wishes and stated that the apanage will remain the same.

The spokesman for finance issues for the Danish People's Party (the govrnment's most important support party), Rene Christensen, says: "I don't believe we should (cut the apanage). There is no doubt the Prince will still be there to support the Queen, even though from a less visible post".

But the most interesting reaction is this one from the main opposition party, the Social Democrats. Here spokesman for finance, Benny Engelbrecht, says: "We follow the recommendation the Prime Minister has presented. I'm sure that there, as is the norm, has been a dialogue between the DRF and the Prime Minister's office and I'm sure there are very good reasons for the Prime Minister's recommendation".

Translated: The DRF and the government has discussed the matter and agreed upon a solution. - That's also what we could expect.
So this will at least have been a few weeks in the making.

PH's last official job was in November I read somewhere.

It's no secret that PH (and to a good extent QMII as well) has been in semi-retirement for the last couple of years. He has even said so publicly that he is cutting down on his work a few times.
But from being unofficially in retirement to go to officially retired is an interesting step.

- It will certainly quell any further bad press in the future, like PH's absence during QMII's birthday celebrations.
From now on, if he is absent, it's simply because he has retired. - And not because he has "opted" to stay away on purpose or because he has been deemed "unfit" to attend that day.
- That episode was very costly for PH! He had gained in popularity and almost become a cult-figure, not least for the young, because he was in so many ways refreshingly unorthodox.

I am surprised that -in one go- the costs of the monarchy are discussed on the day of the announcement itself. In the Netherlands after the public retirement of Princess Juliana in 1999 or the ongoing illness of Prince Claus since 1982 I have never heard any parliamentarian nagging that Princess Juliana or Claus should be cut in their income because they have retreated. Strange that in wealthy Denmark this is such an issue on the very same day as the announcement.

 

[Princess Robijn]

I hope he isn't sick.

 

[tommy100]

It sounds like the government stated straight away the appanage wouldn't be cut. If i recall correctly it was even stated in the announcement that the Lord Chamberlain made as soon as the NY speech ended on TV, as such I think the Court and Government are getting out in front of the issue first, stating that the appanage won't change before the media have time to think too much about it and start pestering. Sometimes it is better to confront an issue head on and make your position clear rather than let the media make a fuss later on.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Hm... okay. The difference maybe is that in the one country (NL) the incomes are set in Law since 1972 and fixed with the general pay rise. It is purely attached to the position in the Royal House and not a sort of "prestation contract". In NL Parliament has barely any say in the heighth of the incomes as these are related to the incomes of civil servants. In Denmark Parliament determines how much money the members of the royal family get, the civil list annuity per person. Maybe that is the difference, as in Denmark parliamentarians have a direct influence on the incomes, so that maybe is indeed a reason for the Government to be so quick with statements about the income of the Prince.

 

[Muhler]

I am surprised that -in one go- the costs of the monarchy are discussed on the day of the announcement itself. In the Netherlands after the public retirement of Princess Juliana in 1999 or the ongoing illness of Prince Claus since 1982 I have never heard any parliamentarian nagging that Princess Juliana or Claus should be cut in their income because they have retreated. Strange that in wealthy Denmark this is such an issue on the very same day as the announcement.

I think you misunderstand.
It is not an issue, politically speaking. The main political parties will follow the recommendation of the PM - as they always do in regards to the DRF. Otherwise PH wouldn't have retired officially.
While there is a set procedure in the Netherlands that's not the case in DK.

Not even Queen Ingrid officially retired. She just quietly lessened her workload and eventually stopped appearing and then died.

That's why this is seen as odd here in DK.
PH was already semi-retired and if he couldn't manage a state visit or the summer cruises anymore, he could merely have said so. I doubt anyone would have blamed him, he's 81.
That's why I personally lean towards Alzheimer or something similar. A gradual deterioration of his mind, combined with ever more erratic behavior.
I think he would prefer to be remembered for being slightly eccentric, rather than for standing up during a press conference and declaring that "Dogs have naked ears" or insist on being addressed as king.

There is no fixed line of progress. You can't say that in three months he'll starts walking the corridors at night. Or that he two months later can't remember his children anymore.
So to put it harsh: When he has his good days, he can be allowed out. On bad days, he's "in retirement".

We'll see. In six months we'll be more certain I think.

Of course this will create a precedence for royals retiring and the debate about QMII abdicating will start up again.

 

[Queen Claude]

I think Henrik's antics, resentments and unpredictability could have played a role in his retirement, regardless the man is over 80 years and is obviously frail and as such I fully agree with and support his retirement. His job certainly was not a physically taxing one, at least not for someone in decent health, and it had loads of perks but again he's over 80 and has been on the job for almost 50 years and I don't begrudge him or any other royal with this length of service choosing to retire. More power to the royals who plan to leave their jobs feet first, but I don't see dishonor in choosing retirement.

 

[Blog Real]

I think you misunderstand.
It is not an issue, politically speaking. The main political parties will follow the recommendation of the PH - as they always do in regards to the DRF. Otherwise PH wouldn't have retired officially.
While there is a set procedure in the Netherlands that's not the case in DK.

Not even Queen Ingrid officially retired. She just quietly lessened her workload and eventually stopped appearing and then died.

That's why this is seen as odd here in DK.
PH was already semi-retired and if he couldn't manage a state visit or the summer cruises anymore, he could merely have said so. I doubt anyone would have blamed him, he's 81.
That's why I personally lean towards Alzheimer or something similar. A gradual deterioration of his mind, combined with ever more erratic behavior.
I think he would prefer to be remembered for being slightly eccentric, rather than for standing up during a press conference and declaring that "Dogs have naked ears" or insist on being addressed as king.

There is no fixed line of progress. You can't say that in three months he'll starts walking the corridors at night. Or that he two months later can't remember his children anymore.
So to put it harsh: When he has his good days, he can be allowed out. On bad days, he's "in retirement".

We'll see. In six months we'll be more certain I think.

Of course this will create a precedence for royals retiring and the debate about QMII abdicating will start up again.

I also think that Prince Henrik must be sick.
Neither the Duke of Edinburgh withdrew from public life and already has more than 90 years, so there is no reason for infirm Prince Henrik do this, unless tena serious health problems.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

But if illness is the reason, why not be open about it? I mean if this illness is so grave that the retirement is enforced (eg aggressive cancer, dementia) it will show within next year anyway and people might think, ok, but why didn't they say so?

 

[LadyFinn]

I also think that Prince Henrik must be sick.
Neither the Duke of Edinburgh withdrew from public life and already has more than 90 years, so there is no reason for infirm Prince Henrik do this, unless tena serious health problems.

Prince Henrik isn't the Duke of Edinburgh. Denmark isn't the United Kingdom. Every person, also prince Henrik, has the right to make the decision which is best for him for the days left for him in this life. Especially when he is over 80 years old.

 

[LadyRohan]

Hm... okay. The difference maybe is that in the one country (NL) the incomes are set in Law since 1972 and fixed with the general pay rise. It is purely attached to the position in the Royal House and not a sort of "prestation contract". In NL Parliament has barely any say in the heighth of the incomes as these are related to the incomes of civil servants. In Denmark Parliament determines how much money the members of the royal family get, the civil list annuity per person. Maybe that is the difference, as in Denmark parliamentarians have a direct influence on the incomes, so that maybe is indeed a reason for the Government to be so quick with statements about the income of the Prince.

The repeated use of the Netherlands as an example is not an apt or good one in the context of abdication or retirement, for the simple reason that the Nordic and British Royal Houses frown at the mention of the 'Dutch model', as one that is not desireable to establish in these kingdoms. Ones personal views aside, the monarchs in Scandinavia and Britain have made it clear repeatedly that they will not abdicate. There is no real precedent for a consort retiring either, but as some have remarked earlier in this thread, the Prince Consort is an artist, and a fairly independent man. He has made a call, and whatever the reason(s), that's that.
I do notice however, that in the Danish papers today it is quite clear that there are NO indications of health reasons behind this decision, and if you remove that factor, it is more likely that he simply feels like he has done what he can in his role, he doesn't think it will harm the RF or the Queen for him to withdraw and it could also be the case, that the mature man he is, feels that he has drawn enough controversy and criticism to his own person, and the institution he represents.

One can repeat the argument over and over, that he is old. That in general, is not a factor that is relevant in Nordic monarchies. Age sometimes requires different schedules, and reduced workloads, but it is not a part of our custom to retire, or abdicate, from royal duties. They will simply be scaled to what is manageable.

Dowager Queens like Queen Ingrid of Denmark withdrawing in her final years is also not a good example, as her daughter was the reigning Queen, and the Dowager was not a part of everyday royal life to ensure a continuation of the monarchy. The same happened with Princess Lilian of Sweden, Princess Alice of Gloucester etc, when age demanded that they withdraw from public life.

With regards to the recent abdications, yes, some of them were premature and for all intents and purposes, wrong. For Albert of the Belgians to retire, draw a salary and do nothing, is not a good way for a King to behave, in my book. Grand Duke Jean could had been on the Luxembourg throne for decades, and have his son act as regent now that his age is great and health is weak. The Popes have always been old, and fairly frail, at the end. Benedictus would not be unique in that regard. Have we already forgotten John Paul? Beatrix abdicating is just silly to me. The woman is still in great health and could had done the job for a lot longer, but it's just how it's done in the Netherlands. One can almost hear Elizabeth II sigh, and say: 'Typical Dutch'. The only recent abdication that I support, is the one of Juan Carlos. For Spain, it was a matter of safeguarding the throne, and in such a case, abdications can, and sometimes should, happen.

If ones view is that a monarch should retire, that's fine. It simply is not how it's done in Scandinavia, or in Britain, for that matter. I personally think the Prince Consort had grown tired of the role, the criticism and didn't want to harm the monarchy to any extent, so withdrawing from public life was seen as the best option there was.

 

[Muhler]

But if illness is the reason, why not be open about it? I mean if this illness is so grave that the retirement is enforced (eg aggressive cancer, dementia) it will show within next year anyway and people might think, ok, but why didn't they say so?

Yes.

I don't believe in the cancer theory anymore.
If he is terminally ill, they could merely say that he is ill and won't appear in public for some time...

Dementia is another thing.
PH may even have wished that the official explanation is retirement, rather than Alzheimer or something similar. He's a very proud man and of an older generation. He may see it as a shame that his mind is deteriorating. Perhaps he is struggling with acknowledging it himself.

But if it's not cancer or dementia, why retire officially?
And if he can't manage the travels anymore, why not say so? - PH has not in the past been ashamed about telling how ill he feels. (It's a favorite topic about many people BTW. If you want to please someone just tell them they look a bit under the weather. Their faces brighten up. )
And that leads to the third assumption: That he has gone into retirement in protest of not becoming king.
If that is the case and he is otherwise seen hopping merrily around at Cayz, or elsewhere in the world, it will be destructive for his image. - But less embarrassing for the DRF as a whole than if he stayed on...
Because if he is still of sound mind, he cannot even think about becoming king, now that he has retired. Because the public conclusion will immediately be that he was "retired out" by QMII. Sacked if you will. (QMII may love him dearly, but she's also the Monarch).

That's why the next few months will be most interesting.

 

[LadyRohan]

I have to confess, the first thought that struck me when I watched the speech last night, was that this was a discreet way for a monarch to separate. Instead of living apart like King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia, or Princess Birgitta of Sweden and Prince Johann Georg of Hohenzollern, it might just be that the Queen has made it clear to her ageing husband, who might have wanted their children to take over, that she will not abdicate, that she is not ready to reduce her own role or workload, and that he made the choice to take a step away from the 'family firm', and spend his final years doing what he wants.

Monarchs don't really do divorce. They do however sometimes adjust their working conditions to fit the personal troubles or decisions made.

This is however, just a speculation, and despite it being my initial thought during the speech, I'm not sure I believe it myself.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

But if illness is the reason, why not be open about it? I mean if this illness is so grave that the retirement is enforced (eg aggressive cancer, dementia) it will show within next year anyway and people might think, ok, but why didn't they say so?

When Princess Juliana of the Netherlands retired completely from the royal scène in 1999, it was also not revealed that she was suffering or something like that. Just her announcement and that was it.

Two years later her husband Prince Bernhard remarked in an interview: "My wife's memory is, you can say: zero. Sometimes she does not recognize people, and the family". The Court felt enforced to declare that the Princess was not suffering Alzheimer's Disease to stop speculation in media. Until then the information was no more than: "the Princess has retreated more and more in her own world". Source

I think the health of Prince Henrik is primarily considered a private matter. After all he is everything but the head of state. He is "just" the spouse, of course. When Queen Margrethe would suffer something, we probably would see official bulletins on her health.

 

[xenobia]

I also think that Prince Henrik must be sick.
Neither the Duke of Edinburgh withdrew from public life and already has more than 90 years, so there is no reason for infirm Prince Henrik do this, unless tena serious health problems.

If health reasons was the main reason behind his retirement, why would the court say that he's keeping his patronages and some other official duties?

Count me into the group who thinks that the main reason for this is that he's simply not interested in the job anymore, as shown by his (imo) childish behavior the last year. His health may also not be the best - and perhaps also in decline - but that doesn't mean that health reasons are the primary reason for his retirement.

 

[Viv]

Ido notice however, that in the Danish papers today it is quite clear that there are NO indications of health reasons behind this decision

Well, giving physical illness as a reason would be the 'easy' way out, wouldn't it?! However I'm not sure that the Royal Court would announce such a thing whereas I'm convinced that they'd never publish anything about a RF member sufffering from dementia or the like.

I read somewhere in a book on the DRF the, title of which I've forgotten - (maybe a sign of pre dementia?) that they didn't like to talk about illnesses; they are considered being something very private. If I remember correctly, Prince Richard (Berleburg) said something to the same effect when he had cancer some years ago.

One can repeat the argument over and over, that he is old. That in general, is not a factor that is relevant in Nordic monarchies. Age sometimes requires different schedules, and reduced workloads, but it is not a part of our custom to retire, or abdicate, from royal duties. They will simply be scaled to what is manageable..

An important point, glad you mentioned it!

viv

 

[Mbruno]

With regards to the recent abdications, yes, some of them were premature and for all intents and purposes, wrong. For Albert of the Belgians to retire, draw a salary and do nothing, is not a good way for a King to behave, in my book. Grand Duke Jean could had been on the Luxembourg throne for decades, and have his son act as regent now that his age is great and health is weak. The Popes have always been old, and fairly frail, at the end. Benedictus would not be unique in that regard. Have we already forgotten John Paul? Beatrix abdicating is just silly to me. The woman is still in great health and could had done the job for a lot longer, but it's just how it's done in the Netherlands. One can almost hear Elizabeth II sigh, and say: 'Typical Dutch'. The only recent abdication that I support, is the one of Juan Carlos. For Spain, it was a matter of safeguarding the throne, and in such a case, abdications can, and sometimes should, happen.

King Albert's abdication in Belgium seems to me to have had the same motivation as King Juan Carlos' abdication in Spain, i.e. Albert probably felt that leaving the throne to Philippe would strengthen the position of the Belgian monarchy, which proved to be definitely true in hindsight. I agree with you though on Beatrix stepping down for no apparent reason.

 

[Lee-Z]

King Albert's abdication in Belgium seems to me to have had the same motivation as King Juan Carlos' abdication in Spain, i.e. Albert probably felt that leaving the throne to Philippe would strengthen the position of the Belgian monarchy, which proved to be definitely true in hindsight. I agree with you though on Beatrix stepping down for no apparent reason.

with the risk of getting too far OT in this thread, imo P.Beatrix' abdication had a lot to do with the shock and sadness from the accident and eventual death of her second son P.Friso...i always had the feeling that after the accident she just couldn't fully dedicate herself anymore to "the business" of being a monarch as she thought a monarch should and probably in very thorough discussion with her ekdest son WA decided that the time of abdication had come...

just my 2cts...

 

[Mbruno]

If health reasons was the main reason behind his retirement, why would the court say that he's keeping his patronages and some other official duties?

Count me into the group who thinks that the main reason for this is that he's simply not interested in the job anymore, as shown by his (imo) childish behavior the last year. His health may also not be the best - and perhaps also in decline - but that doesn't mean that health reasons are the primary reason for his retirement.

There is really no precedent I can recall of a royal consort retiring from public duty for a reason other than health issues. If a consort is no longer "interested" in the job, the appropriate thing to do would be to seek a divorce, or at least some type of estranged marriage arrangement. Keeping his marital status while giving up official state business seems inconsistent to me as the two are tied together IMHO.

 

[xenobia]

There is really no precedent I can recall of a royal consort retiring from public duty for a reason other than health issues. If a consort is no longer "interested" in the job, the appropriate thing to do would be to seek a divorce, or at least some type of estranged marriage. Keeping his marital status while giving up official state business seems inconsistent to me as the two are tied together IMHO.

Well, in all other cases I would agree with you, but this is Henrik we're talking about... He has a very special mind of his own, for better and for worse. Last year, the "for worse"-part was clearly evident. My personal guess is that he has come to an age where he doesn't care what others think. He speaks his mind and makes his own decision, which includes pouting and not showing up on his wifes birthday. I think he will be a happier man if he's not so bound by the restraints of royal obligations. He can spend more time in France and with his grandkids. And a happier Henrik is a better support for the queen than the unreasonable childish behavior of his that she had to deal with the last year (and many times before that).

 

[Muhler]

As said in a previous post it's really weird to read the Danish press coverage of PH's retirement. - They are almost obituaries!
Here are a number of clips from TV2 of PH at his best - and worst...

Pandakostume, pytonkrone og paradeuniform: Prins Henrik i rampelyset | Nyheder

 

[cepe]

Two thoughts:

First, that the whole thing is totally bonkers as he is scheduled to attend all the New Year events.....

Then I see him on video for tonight's event and he is unsteady on his feet and v slow. So on 2nd thoughts maybe there are health issues (not terminal)

I know little about his health - is he arthritic? It seems that they know he is slowing down and rather than put up with rumour and speculation, they decided to control the position. Times have changed since Q Ingrid etc. Media happy to gossip and speculate now therefore controlling the issue

 

[tommy100]

retired...but at tonights New Year Gala? It all seems a bit odd to me, if he is to retire then he should retire and not do public duties. How can he turn up for somethings but not others and call it retirement and the Court not expect questions to be asked?

 

[royal rob]

I'm going to wait and see before I make comments. I would hate to say he's just behaving badly then discover he is indeed ill. M and F will do a great job supporting the Queen so it should all go smoothly.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[polyesco]

Two thoughts:

First, that the whole thing is totally bonkers as he is scheduled to attend all the New Year events.....

Then I see him on video for tonight's event and he is unsteady on his feet and v slow. So on 2nd thoughts maybe there are health issues (not terminal)

I know little about his health - is he arthritic? It seems that they know he is slowing down and rather than put up with rumour and speculation, they decided to control the position. Times have changed since Q Ingrid etc. Media happy to gossip and speculate now therefore controlling the issue

I believe he is not scheduled to attend the 5th and 6th events anymore,
H.M. Dronningen afholder nytårskur i Christian VII's Palæ kl. 9.50 | Kongehuset - Forside
only the Crown Prince couple with the Queen

 

[Soula]

Sick or not, at the end of the day he could have scaled down his duties in a dignified way without all the fuss, attention and talk about retirement.

There have been comments about Henrik coming from 'noble' blood and Mary being a 'commoner'. When you consider his continued bad behaviour over the years compared to the way that Mary has always conducted herself in a manner that is beyond reproach IMO she is the 'noble' one.

 

[Calenei]

Well lets be honest what has Mary had to complain about? She wasn't 'noble' blood but was still able to marry a Crown Prince and someday she will be Queen consort. We have no idea how she would react if she was going to be only Princess consort. IMO no one is beyond reproach.

 

[Soula]

Well lets be honest what has Mary had to complain about? She wasn't 'noble' blood but was still able to marry a Crown Prince and someday she will be Queen consort. We have no idea how she would react if she was going to be only Princess consort. IMO no one is beyond reproach.

He knew what he was getting into when he married. To my knowledge no male consort has been crowned a king. Prince Phillip is far from my favorite royal but look at the way he has supported QE11. He's 95 and has had health issues but he carried out 250 engagements last year. Says it all I think.....

 

[ricarda]

Sick or not, at the end of the day he could have scaled down his duties in a dignified way without all the fuss, attention and talk about retirement.

There have been comments about Henrik coming from 'noble' blood and Mary being a 'commoner'. When you consider his continued bad behaviour over the years compared to the way that Mary has always conducted herself in a manner that is beyond reproach IMO she is the 'noble' one.

It was the queen who chose to make an announcement in her New Year's speech.

 

[Nordic]

Well lets be honest what has Mary had to complain about? She wasn't 'noble' blood but was still able to marry a Crown Prince and someday she will be Queen consort. We have no idea how she would react if she was going to be only Princess consort.

Well, Mary has never complained about anything, has she? She was not the only one who was "able" to marry without having noble blood.
And she would never complain if she became "only" a 'Princess Consort'.

I can name several posters at this board, who would be very pleased if she doesn't become 'Queen Mary' in the future...

 

[Calenei]

Again what does she have to complain about? Of course she hasn't. This was my point. I am still trying to figure out why she is even part of the discussion except to point out how perfect she is.