"Honorary" members certainly won't get any recognition from the government. But they don't under the current version either. I don't believe this version would "ban" a caucus deciding to allow them anymore than the previous one would.
I wouldn't interpret it that way either, but I could see how someone would. I don't want (not that it matters unless this bill stays here for three more weeks
) a bill to pass that includes a point that could reasonably be interpreted to mean that, especially when it could say something like:
4. Only members from one party will be recognized by the federal government.
that would effectively mean the same thing as what you are arguing for but cannot be intepreted to mean something else.