It's clearly meant to enhance fairness, and I'd like to reiterate that point. Back in 2003, Chief Justice Lamer recommended that a shift be made to a situation of security of tenure until retirement. The government accepted that policy and tried three times--in Bill C-7, Bill C-45, and Bill C-41--to implement in legislation security of tenure for military judges until retirement. The only real distinction between those bills and this, in the wake of the LeBlanc decision, is that the court has indicated a preference to have an age specified in the act, rather than rely on regulations. That's why this bill was structured.
To respond to the point you asked, sir, this bill is very much intended to enhance independence of military judges, and that is a key element of perceptions of fairness in the system.