I am going to stick my head up over the parapet and say that I am unequivocally in favour of mandatory vaccination.
From being very aware and very cautious about Covid, people seem now to feel that the threat has gone away. Hardly anyone wears a mask, there's no social distancing and people aren't wary of cramming together in crowded places. It's impossible to know whether most people are still scrupulous about handwashing but my guess would be "No."
But the danger hasn't gone away. Vaccination has been a game-changer as far as the death rate is concerned but the numbers show that the infection rate is still high, many need hospitalisation and people are still dying. There is also the knock-on effect of treatment needed by people with other serious illnesses being delayed because NHS resources are needed to treat large numbers of Covid sufferers.
The unvaccinated are more likely to catch and spread the virus, more likely to need hospital care and to die. Vaccinating everyone, except those unable to be done for genuine medical reasons, makes sense to me. I realise that some people would see it as an infringement of their freedom and I don't disagree. Sometimes we have to give up a degree of our freedom in the interests of others. That's what laws are for. I might want to be free to drive at 70 m.p.h. through a residential area but I can't, as I might infringe another person's freedom to survive if my car hits them.
You could say that compulsory medical treatment is more radical than just obeying the speed limit. That's true, of course, but in times of crisis we expect people to do radical things for the common good. In war, we ask people to risk injury, mental trauma and death for the sake of society as a whole and, if they don't volunteer, sometimes we compel them. If we make demands on people's individual freedoms during war, with the argument that they are serving the greater good, can't we do it during peacetime? I would say that a highly contagious virus is a more obvious threat to society than the grounds of many wars.
You may think that it's an exaggerated example but imagine if there had been a flu vaccine in 1918. Would it have made sense to legally require men to risk being maimed or slaughtered in the trenches, but not legally require anyone to be vaccinated to prevent the 50 million deaths from the Spanish flu?