Legislation in Great Britain and the United States. A few of the important differences between Canada's Natural Products Marketing Act and the British Marketing Act might be worthy of note. The Dominion Marketing Board cannot engage in marketing, fix prices, or control production and, of course, none of these powers can be delegated to Local Boards established under marketing schemes. However, as indicated in section 4, paragraph 1 (a), of the Act, a Local Board may designate a marketing agency or agencies, which will be the agency of the persons whose product is regulated, through which the product may be marketed, but the Local Board cannot engage in marketing. The British Act of 1931 provides that a Board created under its authority may engage in the marketing of a product. It may acquire facilities, take control of the product, and dispose of it and in so doing, may establish prices. The British Act also provides a definite percentage that must support a scheme before assent can be given to it.

That part of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of the United States which deals with marketing agreements in some respects resembles the Natural Products Marketing Act but there are some marked differences. Under marketing agreements provision may be made for setting prices. The Control Committees which administer marketing agreements are not corporate bodies and enforcement of regulations rests with the Administration in Washington. There is no provision for the designation of a marketing agency under the United States legislation. In both the United States and British legislation provision is made for Consumers' Councils or Committees to investigate schemes and agreements from the consumers' standpoint; there is no such provision in the Canadian legislation but, as I have mentioned above, the Canadian Act aims at the protection of both producer and consumer by making it an offence for anyone to charge an excessive amount for the marketing, processing, or converting of a natural product.