I think the departmental witnesses here are trying to signal that Monsieur Ménard's amendment would change the definition in part 2. But merely changing the definition in part 2 would not allow him to achieve the objective he has of allowing the accrual of pension benefits, as would normally happen and as he apparently wishes to provide for here.
The section looks like it changes the definition of service for the whole act. It doesn't. It would only apply to things like death benefits rather than the pensionable service benefit.
So it doesn't mean it's out of order. It doesn't mean we can't pass it. It probably means it doesn't accomplish the objective that I think Monsieur Ménard was looking for.
The chair has noted potential difficulties in relation to the Income Tax Act in relation to the royal recommendation and in terms of the scope of the bill. But could I confirm for the record that adopting this amendment and implementing it--whether or not there would be a charge to the consolidated revenue fund--might trigger the need for a changed or additional royal recommendation.