A clear distinction needs to be made between machinery and equipment and technology.

(Baonghean.vn) - Representative Le Quang Huy (Nghe An National Assembly Delegation) believes that a clear distinction should be made between machinery and equipment and technology, because each type is regulated by different laws.

Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of the 3rd Session of the 14th National Assembly regarding the draft Law on Science and Technology Transfer (amended), Representative Le Quang Huy - Deputy Secretary of the Nghe An Provincial Party Committee (Nghe An Provincial National Assembly Delegation) - said that he highly appreciated the draft Law on Science and Technology Transfer because it contains many very positive and innovative mechanisms and policies, promising to create a favorable and breakthrough legal environment to help transfer science and technology better, develop the science and technology market and apply science and technology. When this draft law is promulgated, it can clarify the position and role of science and technology as a top national priority and a driving force for economic development.

Representative Le Quang Huy discusses the draft Law on Science and Technology Transfer with reporters on the morning of June 2nd. Photo: Thanh Loan

Representative Le Quang Huy stated that the draft Law on Science and Technology Transfer (amended) contains two fundamental issues with far-reaching implications that need to be discussed and clarified.

First, Article 2 concerns the scope of application. The draft law states that it applies to those participating in the process of technology application and innovation. The issue here is that application and innovation is merely a step after the technology has been transferred and applied. For example, there's the process of deciphering the technology, exploring and analyzing the core technical content, and potentially developing the science and technology market.

Clearly, those entities involved in those stages should also be subject to this law. Simply including technology transfer and innovation application is insufficient. According to Representative Le Quang Huy, perhaps it's not necessary to include the application of technological innovation as an entity. Instead, the law should only generally stipulate participation in and involvement in technology transfer.

The second issue is the need to distinguish between technology and machinery and equipment. According to Clause 2, Article 3, the concept of technology is defined as solutions, know-how, and processes, but this may or may not include machinery, equipment, means, and tools. Clause 1, Article 5, states "the following technologies," but point D implies "machinery and equipment." "Such a regulation easily leads to the misunderstanding that machinery and equipment are also technology. I think that's not the case. Machinery and equipment are carriers; they are what convey the content and implement technology, deploy technology, and in some cases, are technological products," Representative Quang Huy analyzed.

Recently, there has been a phenomenon where the import of machinery and equipment is attributed to the role of the science and technology sector. However, in reality, machinery and equipment are considered goods. And when goods are imported, they are regulated by the Commercial Law and other related laws. Therefore, separating them is very accurate.

Representative Le Quang Huy suggested that Clause 1 of Article 5 needs to be revised to clearly distinguish between technology and equipment.

Reporter/Collaborator Group