Whoa there, big fella.
We still haven’t established that the operative provisions which point to those words you highlighted in the definition of “Part 141 flight training” have the effect of prohibiting all instructors, other than instructors engaged by a Part 141 operator, from delivering training during a flight review.
That said, the authority to “conduct training to meet the general competency requirement in regulation 61.385” (CASR 61.1165(e)) could be interpreted as giving an ‘independent’ instructor with the appropriate training endorsement the authority to conduct only ground training to meet the general competency requirements.
Perhaps there is an intended difference drawn in 61.1165 between “flight training” and “training” (and “flight reviews” and “dual flight checks” etc). Maybe the authority in CASR 61.1165(e) permits the ‘independent’ instructor to conduct ground training in aircraft systems/W&B/landing and take off performance/normal, abnormal and emergency flight procedures. (In which case the ‘independent’ instructor would not have authority to conduct ‘flight training’ during a flight review, except for flight training for an endorsement (other than a flight examiner endorsement or for an endorsement on an operation rating) because ‘independent’ instructors are allowed to conduct that flight training under the authority granted by 61.1165(a).
The alternative (and plain English) interpretation is that “training” in 61.1165 is a general term covering all training including “flight training” and ground training, in which case the authority to “conduct training to meet the general competency requirement” covers ground and flight training and, therefore, independent instructors with the appropriate training endorsement may conduct that kind of training during a flight review….