I completely agree. I'd take up that particular point. It sends a clear message that this is how things are supposed to be done. Yes, in some ways this is involving codification of what's been established in case law, but I do think that having it written in law and having something to hold on to has some power to set intention as well as tone.
I think that what is being proposed—reiterating needs around restraint and reiterating that it should be reasonable to get people to comply and that we should consider vulnerable groups—is not harmful. However, I see it simply as a start.