GreatNorthCollective/greatnorth-canada-federal-laws-text huggingface dataset:
Veterans Review and Appeal Board Regulations — 6
6 (1) Where a question of interpretation is raised by an appellant pursuant to section 30 of the Act, or is referred to the Board pursuant to section 37 of the Act, the appellant or the person or organization shall submit to the Board (a) a statement of the question; and (b) the facts and arguments to be relied on at the hearing of the question. (2) Where it is of the opinion that the question is not trivial, frivolous or vexatious, the Board shall (a) in the case of a question raised pursuant to section 30 of the Act, stay the appeal proceedings; (b) notify the persons and organizations named in section 2 of the Prescribed Persons and Organizations Regulations , other than those who referred the question to the Board; and (c) annex to the notice a copy of the question and arguments raised by the appellant or referred by the person or organization.
Veterans Review and Appeal Board Regulations — 7
7 Every decision of the Board shall (a) state the issue on review, reconsideration or appeal, or the question of interpretation; (b) state the reasons for the decision; (c) state the names of the members who took part in the decision; (d) include the signature of at least one of the members who took part in the decision; (e) in the case of a review panel decision, inform the applicant that the applicant has the right to appeal to the Board and that, in pursuing this right of appeal, the applicant may be represented, free of charge, by the Bureau of Pensions Advocates or a service bureau of a veterans’ organization or, at the applicant’s own expense, by any other representative; (f) in the case of an appeal panel decision, annex to the decision the reasons for dissent, if any, signed by the dissenting members of the appeal panel.
Veterans Review and Appeal Board Regulations — 8
8 The Board shall send written notice of its decision (a) in the case of an application for review or an application for reconsideration pursuant to subsection 32(1) of the Act, to the applicant and to the Minister; (b) in the case of an appeal, to the appellant and to the Minister; (c) in the case of a question of interpretation raised by the appellant, (i) to the persons referred to in paragraph (b), and (ii) to the persons and organizations named in section 2 of the Prescribed Persons and Organizations Regulations ; (d) in the case of a referral of a question of interpretation to the Board (i) to the person or organization who referred the question to the Board, and to the Minister, and (ii) to the persons and organizations named in section 2 of the Prescribed Persons and Organizations Regulations , other than the person or organization referred to in subparagraph (i); (e) in the case of an application for a compassionate award under subsection 34(1) of the Act or an application for reconsideration pursuant to subsection 34(7) of the Act, to the applicant and to the Minister; and (f) in the case of a reconsideration by the Board on its own motion pursuant to subsection 23(1), 32(1) or 34(7) of the Act, to the applicant or appellant and to the Minister.
Prescribed Persons and Organizations Regulations — *
His Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Veterans Affairs, pursuant to paragraph 45(e) of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act * , is pleased hereby to make the annexed Regulations prescribing persons and organizations . * S.C. 1995, c. 18
Prescribed Persons and Organizations Regulations — 1
1 These Regulations may be cited as the Prescribed Persons and Organizations Regulations .
Prescribed Persons and Organizations Regulations — 2
2 The following persons and organizations are prescribed for the purposes of sections 30 and 37 of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act : (a) the Army, Navy and Air Force Veterans in Canada; (b) the Bureau of Pensions Advocates; (c) the Merchant Navy Coalition for Equality; (d) the Minister of Veterans Affairs; (e) the National Council of Veteran Associations in Canada; and (f) the Royal Canadian Legion.
Proclamation Designating Certain Countries as Designated States for Purposes of the Act — Proclamation Designating Certain Countries as Designated States for Purposes of the Act
To All to Whom these Presents shall come or whom the same may in anyway concern,
Proclamation Designating Certain Countries as Designated States for Purposes of the Act — Proclamation Designating Certain Countries as Designated States for Purposes of the Act
Whereas section 4 of the Visiting Forces Act , chapter V-2 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, provides that the Governor in Council may by proclamation designate any country as a designated state for the purposes of the Act and declare the extent to which that Act is applicable in respect of any designated state;
Proclamation Designating Certain Countries as Designated States for Purposes of the Act — (a)
Now Know you that We, by and with the advice of Our Privy Council for Canada and pursuant to Order in Council P.C. 1995-1969 of November 23, 1995, do by this Our Proclamation (a) designate the Republic of Benin, the Republic of El Salvador, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Nicaragua and Romania as designated states for the purposes of the Visiting Forces Act ; and (b) declare that the Visiting Forces Act , with the exception of Part VI, is applicable in respect of the designated states referred to in paragraph (a).
Proclamation Designating Certain Countries as Designated States for Purposes of the Act — (a)
(a) designate the Republic of Benin, the Republic of El Salvador, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Nicaragua and Romania as designated states for the purposes of the Visiting Forces Act ; and
Proclamation Designating Certain Countries as Designated States for Purposes of the Act — (b)
(b) declare that the Visiting Forces Act , with the exception of Part VI, is applicable in respect of the designated states referred to in paragraph (a).
Proclamation Designating Certain Countries as Designated States for Purposes of the Act — Proclamation Designating Certain Countries as Designated States for Purposes of the Act
In Testimony Whereof, We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent and the Great Seal of Canada to be hereunto affixed. Witness: Our Right Trusty and Well-beloved Roméo A. LeBlanc, a Member of Our Privy Council for Canada, Chancellor and Principal Companion of Our Order of Canada, Chancellor and Commander of Our Order of Military Merit, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada.
Proclamation Designating Certain Countries as Designated States for Purposes of the Act — Proclamation Designating Certain Countries as Designated States for Purposes of the Act
At Our Government House, in Our City of Ottawa, this twenty-eighth day of December in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and ninety-five and in the forty-fourth year of Our Reign.
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21
Whereas, on October 31, 1995, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission rendered Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 entitled “Implementation of Regulatory Framework — Splitting of the Rate Base and Related Issues”, in which the Commission, under the heading “IV Rate Rebalancing” adopted a plan of local rate increases accompanied by offsetting reductions in long distance rates and specifically directed the Stentor companies affected by the Decision (other than Maritime Tel & Tel Limited) to file, in the form of tariff applications, rate rebalancing proposals consisting of local rate increases of $2 per month and related long distance reductions, to take effect on January 1 in each of the years 1996 and 1997;
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21
Whereas petitions have been filed by the Stentor companies affected by the Decision (other than Manitoba Telephone System), requesting that the Governor in Council vary the Decision to eliminate the reduction of long distance revenues and rates as part of the rate rebalancing program;
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21
Whereas, in its petition, AGT Limited also requested that the Decision be varied to specify that the rate of return on equity employed to calculate the amount of subsidy paid by long distance services to local services at the time of the initial split of the rate base be the actual company-wide forecast rate of return rather than the rate of return specified by the Commission;
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21
Whereas in response to the above-noted petitions, the People for Affordable Telephone Service (PATS) filed a petition requesting that the rate rebalancing portion of the Decision be rescinded;
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21
Whereas, in accordance with subsection 12(4) of the Telecommunications Act * , a notice of receipt of the petitions filed by the Stentor companies was published by the Minister of Industry in the Canada Gazette Part I on December 9, 1995;
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21
Whereas, in accordance with section 13 of that Act, the Minister of Industry has provided an opportunity for provincial consultation;
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (a)
And Whereas the Governor in Council, having considered the AGT Limited petition, the PATS petition and the petitions of the Stentor companies, (a) agrees with the Commission that it is appropriate to reduce the subsidy that flows to local and access services from long distance services and that, therefore, a form of rate rebalancing is appropriate, (b) considers that use of the actual company-wide forecast rate  of  return  rather  than  the  rate  of  return  specified by the Commission would fail to break the link between, the Competitive and Utility segments, thereby frustrating the fundamental objective of the split-rate base approach, (c) considers it is essential that a lifeline program be introduced for telephone subscribers in order to ensure universal access at affordable rates to Canadians everywhere, (d) considers that it is not desirable or necessary to require reductions in long distance rates, as the long distance market is in transition to a competitive market and such reductions would detract from the increased reliance on market forces, and (e) considers that, in the transition to a competitive market, significant price reductions in the long distance market have already occurred and further price reductions would compromise the ability to sustain required investment in the telecommunications system, including investment in research and development and innovative telecommunications services, which would have a negative impact on the objectives of the Canadian telecommunications policy, and in particular the objectives set out in paragraphs 7(a), (b), (c), (f), (g) and (h) of that Act;
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (a)
(a) agrees with the Commission that it is appropriate to reduce the subsidy that flows to local and access services from long distance services and that, therefore, a form of rate rebalancing is appropriate,
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (b)
(b) considers that use of the actual company-wide forecast rate  of  return  rather  than  the  rate  of  return  specified by the Commission would fail to break the link between, the Competitive and Utility segments, thereby frustrating the fundamental objective of the split-rate base approach,
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (c)
(c) considers it is essential that a lifeline program be introduced for telephone subscribers in order to ensure universal access at affordable rates to Canadians everywhere,
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (d)
(d) considers that it is not desirable or necessary to require reductions in long distance rates, as the long distance market is in transition to a competitive market and such reductions would detract from the increased reliance on market forces, and
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (e)
(e) considers that, in the transition to a competitive market, significant price reductions in the long distance market have already occurred and further price reductions would compromise the ability to sustain required investment in the telecommunications system, including investment in research and development and innovative telecommunications services, which would have a negative impact on the objectives of the Canadian telecommunications policy, and in particular the objectives set out in paragraphs 7(a), (b), (c), (f), (g) and (h) of that Act;
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (a)
Therefore, His Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Industry, pursuant to section 12 of the Telecommunications Act * , hereby (a) varies Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 (i) by replacing the second complete paragraph on page 24 with the following: “In light of the above considerations, the Commission finds it appropriate that the telephone companies proceed with a rate rebalancing plan. As in Decision 94-19, the contribution component of the CAT should be reduced by an amount equivalent to the revenues derived from the local rate increases contained in the rebalancing plan.”, (ii) by replacing the third complete paragraph on page 25, wherein the Commission directed the filing of rate rebalancing proposals (local rate increases and long distance reductions), with the following: “The Stentor companies (other than MT&T) are directed to file, in the form of tariff applications, rate rebalancing proposals consisting of local rate increases of $2 per month, to take effect January 1 of each of the years 1996 and 1997, and a new proposed CAT, reflecting a reduced contribution charge equivalent to the revenues derived from the local rate increases. These proposals are to be filed no later than seven days after the making of this Order and December 1, 1996, respectively.”, and (iii) by replacing the third and fourth paragraphs on page 26 with the following: “The Commission would expect to give expeditious approval to rate rebalancing proposals”; and (b) declines (i) to rescind the rate rebalancing portion of Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 as requested in the petition filed by PATS, and (ii) to vary Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 in the manner requested in the petition filed by AGT Limited, with respect to the calculation of the rate of return. * S.C. 1993, c. 38
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (a)
(a) varies Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 (i) by replacing the second complete paragraph on page 24 with the following: “In light of the above considerations, the Commission finds it appropriate that the telephone companies proceed with a rate rebalancing plan. As in Decision 94-19, the contribution component of the CAT should be reduced by an amount equivalent to the revenues derived from the local rate increases contained in the rebalancing plan.”, (ii) by replacing the third complete paragraph on page 25, wherein the Commission directed the filing of rate rebalancing proposals (local rate increases and long distance reductions), with the following: “The Stentor companies (other than MT&T) are directed to file, in the form of tariff applications, rate rebalancing proposals consisting of local rate increases of $2 per month, to take effect January 1 of each of the years 1996 and 1997, and a new proposed CAT, reflecting a reduced contribution charge equivalent to the revenues derived from the local rate increases. These proposals are to be filed no later than seven days after the making of this Order and December 1, 1996, respectively.”, and (iii) by replacing the third and fourth paragraphs on page 26 with the following: “The Commission would expect to give expeditious approval to rate rebalancing proposals”; and
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (i)
(i) by replacing the second complete paragraph on page 24 with the following: “In light of the above considerations, the Commission finds it appropriate that the telephone companies proceed with a rate rebalancing plan. As in Decision 94-19, the contribution component of the CAT should be reduced by an amount equivalent to the revenues derived from the local rate increases contained in the rebalancing plan.”,
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21
“In light of the above considerations, the Commission finds it appropriate that the telephone companies proceed with a rate rebalancing plan. As in Decision 94-19, the contribution component of the CAT should be reduced by an amount equivalent to the revenues derived from the local rate increases contained in the rebalancing plan.”,
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (ii)
(ii) by replacing the third complete paragraph on page 25, wherein the Commission directed the filing of rate rebalancing proposals (local rate increases and long distance reductions), with the following: “The Stentor companies (other than MT&T) are directed to file, in the form of tariff applications, rate rebalancing proposals consisting of local rate increases of $2 per month, to take effect January 1 of each of the years 1996 and 1997, and a new proposed CAT, reflecting a reduced contribution charge equivalent to the revenues derived from the local rate increases. These proposals are to be filed no later than seven days after the making of this Order and December 1, 1996, respectively.”, and
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21
“The Stentor companies (other than MT&T) are directed to file, in the form of tariff applications, rate rebalancing proposals consisting of local rate increases of $2 per month, to take effect January 1 of each of the years 1996 and 1997, and a new proposed CAT, reflecting a reduced contribution charge equivalent to the revenues derived from the local rate increases. These proposals are to be filed no later than seven days after the making of this Order and December 1, 1996, respectively.”, and
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (iii)
(iii) by replacing the third and fourth paragraphs on page 26 with the following: “The Commission would expect to give expeditious approval to rate rebalancing proposals”; and
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21
“The Commission would expect to give expeditious approval to rate rebalancing proposals”; and
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (b)
(b) declines (i) to rescind the rate rebalancing portion of Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 as requested in the petition filed by PATS, and (ii) to vary Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 in the manner requested in the petition filed by AGT Limited, with respect to the calculation of the rate of return.
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (i)
(i) to rescind the rate rebalancing portion of Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 as requested in the petition filed by PATS, and
Order Varying Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 — (ii)
(ii) to vary Telecom Decision CRTC 95-21 in the manner requested in the petition filed by AGT Limited, with respect to the calculation of the rate of return.
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order
Whereas the title to the lands described in the annexes to the annexed Order is vested in Her Majesty in right of Canada;
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order
And Whereas His Excellency the Governor General in Council is satisfied that it is in the public interest to set apart the lands as a National Park Reserve to protect internationally significant heritage resources;
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order
Therefore, His Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Communications, pursuant to subsection 8.5(2) of the National Parks Act , pending the resolution of the disputes outstanding between the Haida Nation and the Government of Canada respecting their rights, titles and interests in or to the Gwaii Haanas Archipelago, hereby makes the annexed Order setting aside certain lands for the Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve .
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — 1
1 This Order may be cited as the Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order .
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — 2
2 The lands described in the two annexes hereto, being lands in the Queen Charlotte Islands, British Columbia, are set aside as a reserve for a national park to be known as the Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve.
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order
Commencing at the intersection of the 52°50′05″ parallel of north latitude with the 131°20′10″ meridian of west longitude (said intersection being a point in Hecate Strait approximately 10 kilometres northeasterly of Lost Islands);
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order
thence westerly in a straight line to the ordinary high water mark at the most northeasterly point of Tangil Peninsula at Porter Head at approximate latitude 52°48′35″ and approximate longitude 131°39′20″ (said line passing approximately 2 kilometres north of Lost Islands);
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order
thence southwesterly in a straight line to the most easterly peak on the Tangil Peninsula at approximate latitude 52°48′10″ and approximate longitude 131°39′39″;
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order
thence generally westerly along the watershed boundary that separates those creeks that flow into Dana Inlet from those that flow into Logan Inlet to the peak at the intersection of the northerly boundary of the watershed of Crescent Inlet with the said watershed boundary that separates those creeks that flow into Dana Inlet from those that flow into Logan Inlet (said peak being at approximate latitude 52°46′37″ and approximate longitude 131°49′09″);
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order
thence southwesterly in a straight line to the northeast corner of Lot 663;
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order
thence southerly and westerly along the easterly and southerly boundaries of said Lot 663 to the intersection with the southerly boundary of the watershed of Crescent Inlet, said intersection marked by a Pipe Post, being a point on the northerly boundary of South Moresby National Park Reserve as shown on Plan 9 Tube 1483 on file with the Surveyor General Branch of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, at Victoria, a duplicate of which is recorded as Plan 72869 in the Canada Lands Surveys Records at Ottawa;
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order
thence generally southwesterly along the southerly boundary of the watershed of said Crescent Inlet, being also a portion of the southerly boundary of Tree Farm Licence 24 Block 2, to the intersection with the easterly boundary of the Lockeport Four Mineral Claim, Record Number 5828(2), said intersection marked by a Pipe Post, being a point on the northerly boundary of the South Moresby National Park Reserve as shown on Plan 27 Tube 1452 on file with the Surveyor General Branch of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, at Victoria, a duplicate of which is recorded as Plan 72242 in the Canada Lands Surveys Records at Ottawa;
Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order — Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve Order
thence southerly and westerly along the easterly and southerly boundaries of the said mineral claim to the intersection with the southerly boundary of the watershed of Crescent Inlet, said intersection marked by a P. Rock being a point on said northerly boundary of the South Moresby National Park Reserve as shown on said Plan 27 Tube 1452;