TECHNOLOGY POLICY 57 It is true that India had no previous experience of technology transfer. But -it did not care to learn from the experience of socialist countries or even other capitalist countries like Japan. Japan is an outstanding example of how technological progress could be hastened by the government and business acting in concert on the basis of clear-cut objectives and determined effort. Japan was against foreign capital while avidly acquiring foreign technology through licensing arrangements, technical contracts and outright purchase. They accorded high priority to machinery manufacture, import substitution, standardization, mass production and improvement of quality. They hired foreign technicians, trained their own and prevented brain drain. In India, on the other hand, the government and the leading industrial houses neither had clarity of objectives nor the requisite will and determination towards technological self-reliance. Foreign companies, most of which were subsidiaries of multinational corporations, had better access to modern technology than the Indian industrialists. But, the R & D activities of the multinationals are closely guarded secrets of the parent companies in their home countries. The Hathi Committee had exposed the secretive afid exploitative nature of foreign-owned subsidiaries in drugs and pharmaceuticals. The story is the same in every branch of industry where multinationals operate. Even when they entered into collaboration with Indian businessmen, they did not part with their latest technology and know-how. In most cases, foreign collaboration has hindered the creation of an independent base for the development of technologies. The collaboration agreements have had many restrictive clauses in respect of the use of know-how, change of design, import, production and sale which prevented their adaptation or absorption. In practice, collaboration agreements have enabled the multinationals to penetrate the Indian market and establish their monopolistic control. Though the real technology transfer did not take place, the Indian collaborator was able to enjoy a share of the profit. At the same time, the growth of small industries which could have benefited from indigenization of foreign technology was hampered. On the other hand, Indian businessmen have lacked the urge and determination to acquire and assimilate foreign technology. In their quest for quick profits, they have been averse to risk-taking and experimentation. They are prone to import complete technology even when a good part of the work could be undertaken by Indian expertise and know-how. Despite handsome fiscal inducements and concessions, private enterprise in India has neglected in-house R&D. Consequently, 90 per cent of Indian scientists and engineers engaged in R & D work are employed in government-owned laboratories and development agencies. There are no close ties between these laboratories and R&D establishments and private business. Often, imported technology did not suit our resource endowments. No