ramesses

Why are you using a chart from last August? 
I'd have thought by now you'd have learnt the basics of this discussion. 
Lockdowns are a means of control of infection rates, they're not a response to deaths, they're a means of preventing them. Countries that have used them effectively use them in short sharp bursts. For example, the state where I am, we've been in lockdown less than a week in the last year, and have had no Covid deaths in that time at all. The lockdowns come when there is any community transmission as a means of getting on top of the outbreak. 
The issue the UK has had is that due to political pressure against actually dealing with the situation properly, lockdowns have largely been used as a reactionary measure, not a proactive one, and using them for this purpose leads to long rolling lockdowns, which while effecting, are no where near as effective as the short proactive ones. 
It's also interesting that this 'flu has claimed x deaths' line has come back from you. For one, the flu and pneumonia combined, which is quite constellation of diseases, has not claimed more than 35k lives in the UK in over 20 years. Covid-19, without making it through the entire population, has claimed over 120k, likely over 150k, in 18 months. That there is the point of controls, boosters, etc. The disease is on another scale to other viruses that cause things like pneumonia.
The expectation would be that if a variant of Covid-19 got out of control again, there would be lockdowns. A set of seasonal diseases, running through the whole population killing 25-35k would not lead to lockdowns, because it's doing so in a way that burns itself out, while Covid-19 is not, as well and truly demonstrated by this point. 

Super Johnny Russell still being super…
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mls/2020/09/13/johnny-russell-lifts-sporting-kc-past-minnesota-united-1-0/114012768/