That is still a good development and a positive step toward the right direction that would still be subject to further debates, discussion and possibly improvement to serve the purpose. This development, and hopefully coupled with the desired political party reforms, could serve as good foundation for any discussion on federalism.
There should be an antidote to the practice of turning government into a family business. No clan should have an exclusive franchise on elective positions which are passed on like heirlooms. But simply banning political dynasties will not automatically result in a level playing field. There should be mechanisms that will truly build parties which are not subsidiaries of business, that will encourage non-career politicos, especially millennials, to serve in the government. A good political reform package must also address turncoatism, which has always been fashionable in politics.
The dominance of political dynasties should be addressed by revisiting the qualifications of those who want to serve in the government. Through an anti-dynasty measure, we can push for a more meaningful political participation by making elective offices more inclusive. Instead of an outright prohibition, I am supportive of regulating members of political families from getting into power. An outright ban might prevent qualified people from serving in government.
The challenge is in the mechanics of the regulation which should be ironclad and without loopholes that could be exploited by imaginative politicians.