On the occasion of this debate with the participation of historians, archaeologists, cultural personalities, people working on the archaeological sites in the zone, representatives of the Presidential Heritage Commission, Diaconu took the floor making reference to the “business” of waste dumps which, in his knowledge, Romania has become today.
“Someone makes money and the other is a waste dump. I do not want to be a waste dump. (…) I seek no other argument. As a citizen, as an owner of part of this country, I do not want it. And I am going to fight with every legal means against this kind of killing for money”, stated Diaconu.
His stand was backed by Ionel Haiduc, President of the Romanian Academy, who pointed out that the start of the mining exploitation in Rosia Montana affects the national heritage.
“The Academy stance does not refer solely to this project, but to some general principles, generally valid for every kind of mining exploitation in Romania and every project affecting the national heritage. Rosia Montana is a particular case. We are not against the company, we are against the project which affects the national heritage, as well”, underlined Haiduc. Attending the debate, economist Ilie Serbanescu said in his turn that he is opposed to this project.
“I do not believe that this figure promoted by the company, of four billion (dollars – editor’s note) is true. It seems to me a very large amount. We do not need Rosia Montana to find out the truth, we can find it out following Petrom, Mineral Waters and every quarry in Romania businesses. In the the current legislative and economic framework the state gets nothing from those exploiting its resources. This is reality. The remainder are variations on the same theme.
I want to stress we do not need Rosia Montana but if there is a precedent with Petrom, if there is a precedent with Sterling, why Rosia Montana project would raise eyebrows?”, added Serbanescu. Serban Sturdza, president of the Architects Organization in Romania drew attention upon the problem of the population in the zone dislocation.
“I say that this project must be closed. There is duplicity as regards the statements made by the company and what it really do. I saw a very advanced project for population dislocation”, said Sturdza.
This idea is supported by Maria Berza, as well, representing Pro Patrimony Foundation; she informed that the foundation examines another way of a really steady development in this zone and that the mining exploitation represents a steady development opportunity through the consolidation of mine galleries and opening them to tourists. Amid the foundation proposals, enumerated by Berza, there are also: traditional mining, conservation and arrangement of galleries, an archaeological park – a national park of archaeology and mining – and agro-tourism.
On the other hand, Adrian Gligor, director of patrimony and steady development of Rosia Montana Gold Corporation (RMGC), maintained in his presentation that there are 47 sites in Romania, with characteristics relatively similar to Rosia Montana, which indicates the fact that this is not unique in terms of Romanian mining history.
He also said that RMGC made a research in Rosia Montana with Romanian state institutions and that a surface of 135 hectares, with houses, lakes, Roman galleries, are included in the company development programme.