That's right.
I think the key thing is that, even at present in the Criminal Code with respect to protection of movable property, the law's not limited only to very minimal force. So if we were to introduce a rule, we would end up pretty quickly back in the same sort of situation the objective of simplification is seeking, which is a variety of different rules, depending on the circumstances. So, really, the objective is to simplify.
I think the objective that Parliament had back in 1892 when they enacted the multitude of provisions was laudable. They were trying to address finely nuanced distinctions between different types of circumstances. But in practice the problem is that it just leads to really complicated jury instructions and difficulties, as we know, for the police in applying the law. So, simplification, unfortunately, requires a level of generality.