COVID-19: "SOONER, TOUGHER, LONGER". THE POLL RESULT AND COMMENTS

For the last two days I have been asking in a twitter poll whether people agree or otherwise with the proposal "We need to stamp down hard on [the new COVID-19 strain/variant] with a short but very tough FireBreak straight after Christmas", as set out in more detail here.

Given I invited known Lockdown Sceptics and people generally, I am amazed with the result 3 to 1 in favour of the proposal:

Whist this is not a proper randomised survey across all demographics, it can perhaps be regarded as 'representative' of people's views.  The result certainly suggests there would be widespread support for tough measures after Christmas.

The written comments in support, including specialist scientists, far outnumbered those against.  The topics were of three types:

1. No time to lose.  Do the Firebreak before Christmas.  But realistically people and businesses need at least a little notice.  
2. Make it tougher, with schools and universities closed.  That is in any case a key aspect of the proposal, to keep them closed until 18 January.  Especially given the new evidence about how this new strain impacts schoolchildren.  Adopting the toughest restrictions possible
   
3. Make it longer.  However:

• The idea is that the theory and past experience is that when restrictions are tough, most of the reduction in cases is in the first three weeks
• We need to get the economy open, so keep the FireBreak as short as possible.  That is three weeks.
  

There is one other significant issue, which is financial support for individuals and businesses during the FireBreak.  In particular:

• An estimated 3 million self-employed who have not been eligible for Government support, other than Universal Credit, often referred to as the #Excluded
  
• The other self-employed whose SEISS3 payment is expected to cover January, but were paid nothing for September and October.  This needs to be rectified promptly.
  

What's your view?