The vaccine passport thing is to be 'debated' and voted on next week. (With an engineered majority and no dissent ever there isn't really any point in a parliamentary vote, you may as well just skip right to whatever Sturgeon thinks goes, but that's a whole other rail.) Putting aside the ethical issues in coercing people to have a medical intervention that may well be riskier for them than not having it (as the SNP have now done apparently), they can't seriously think it will do anything to reduce infection rates? By the time it's enacted that's at least another weeks worth of mixing, and it only covers quite specific venues anyway so these same people could quite legally just mix at home instead. If we assume it takes about a week for infections to work their way through (at the very least) this current peak could be on the way back down again before this 'measure' has any effect.
So is the point to try and make us take the whole issue more seriously and choose not to use our hard-earned freedoms? Is that why it's announced to the media before there's even a debate? Good luck with that! I suspect it might backfire spectacularly like so many SG infection control 'strategies' before it if the unvaccinated decide to get their clubbing in while they can!