Pausing lockdown for Christmas is a disastrous idea – but Boris would rather be liked than do the right thing

I would love to celebrate Christmas, an oasis of calm in what has been a real dog of a year for us all – but it just isn’t worth the potential harm

We all long for proper contact with our families – and not via a phone, a computer screen, or through a pane of glass. A hug, an expression that now seems one of the most precious we have, would feel better than a thousand Zoom calls.

So I understand the government's reticence about telling the country that Christmas is off limits. All this trudging through the linguistic morass of things being "very different" this year points to an administration wary of the significance of definitively saying no. 

The arguments on both sides have plenty of emotional heft. The other significant religious festivals that have had to be curtailed this year – "it's not fair if Christmas is the exception" – versus the idea that it now represents a national holiday that we all enjoy, whatever the other connotations.

But the simple reality is that coronavirus respects no argument, no matter how strong. Doing the interview rounds this morning, the health secretary, Matt Hancock, said that Covid-19 controls will remain in place “until the vaccine can make us safe”. While he said that the rollout of a vaccine could begin next month, it would be January before this would begin in earnest.

“The bulk of the vaccine rollout programme will be in January, February, March. And we hope that sometime after Easter, things will be able to start to get back to normal," Hancock told the BBC.

Some will now shout that the coming vaccine makes a relaxed Christmas more viable, particularly if it is rolled out quickly. I don't believe this is possible – it's not like the government has covered itself in glory trying to get an effective test and trace system up and running. Can we expect any different when it comes to getting vaccines in the hands of everyone across the country in a swift and effective manner?

I would love to celebrate Christmas, an oasis of calm in what has been a real dog of a year for us all. But a relaxation of restrictions, for however long, will not be worth the consequences in January. Boris Johnson promising a more stringent tiered system is all well and good – but given the previous attempt, can we really take the risk with more policy changes made on the hoof and the potential for weeks of more uncertainty?

Yes, there is every likelihood that people will break the rules over Christmas in any case, but caving just because you know it will happen is not the way to govern. Johnson has years before the next election, his ego can afford to take a backseat, even if it means a short-term hit in the polls. If the vaccine rolls out successfully by Easter, how many people will remember what has come before by the time we get to the summer? Let alone when Johnson has to start fighting for votes again.

Beyond the spike in infections that would be an inevitable risk of families mixing at Christmas – a disaster if a big jump were to come to pass – there is also the knock-on effects this would bring. There have been plenty of warnings that the hospitality sector would be hit hard by being allowed to open for a few weeks and then potentially being shuttered in January.

All of this is hypothetical obviously, but the dream of a safe and open Christmas followed by a small, but acceptable in the eyes of the government, rise in infections just does not fit the pattern we have seen for the rest of the year. Is it not best to wait to celebrate properly next year?

The warm glow of a Christmas at home with those you love is a powerful draw – but it just isn't worth the pain that could so easily follow in January.