The coming into force transition clause that's more typical to insolvency law affects only proceedings that start after the coming into force date, to ensure that rules don't change in the middle of an ongoing insolvency proceeding.
What the current private member's bill does is set the coming into force date on a calendar date, five years after coming into force. It doesn't suggest that the coming into force is tied at all to where it is in the proceedings cycle.
As I said, transition clauses for insolvency are often about proceedings that would begin after the coming into force date, as opposed to noting that the provision was in place five years from a calendar date, which would mean that any proceedings that were already under way would be subject to the new rules.