We have been saying that in this thread for some time now.And Woolhouse is emphatic that further lockdowns are not the way to deal with future waves of Covid-19. “Lockdowns aren’t a public health policy. They signify a failure of public health policy,” he states.
Having a set of published interventions and trigger points is something else that has been asked for on here.Instead, the country needs, very quickly, not to be surprised by new variants and not to respond each one in an ad hoc fashion. “We should agree a sliding scale of interventions and trigger points for implementing them. With omicron it all feels a bit chaotic. We need better planning and preparation for when the next variant arrives, as it surely will.”’
I don't remember the lockdown as being popular but did gain the country some time to get effective vaccinations developed.Discussion has polarised to the point that because “protecting the vulnerable” was the fig leaf for actual denialists, it’s become a questionable sentiment in its own right. Clearly not enough was done to protect the vulnerable - or the poor. Lockdown chiefly served the well off and those who could manage their own vulnerabilities - and that’s why it was such a big hit politically: this is the only constituency that matters, politically.
What will be interesting to see post Covid will be maths modelling studies of what was done, what could have been done and what should have been done. As if the graph that @paulfromcamden presented showing damage doe by the virus and damage done by government choices to the economy in 2020 is similar for 2021, then our government has made poor choices all round. But we need more time for more data and more extensive modelling studies to look at potential outcomes.
Yes it seems to have made the well off richer and the more vulnerable and poor, poorer.