On the day the Health Sec announces that the target to offer everyone over 18 a booster (if eligible) by the year end has been met, let's take a look at progress.
321k reported today, down a third on last week.
Total is now 28.4m.
1/
There are still just under 9m who are eligible and yet to be jabbed. Even if we assumed only 90% want to come forward, that would leave around 5m still waiting, predominately U50s.
Many of course will have a recent positive test, so are unable to come forward at the moment.
2/
In total, around 76% of those eligible have been boosted - and where it really matters, over age 50, it's 91%, which is a really good performance.
3/
Comparing the age bands with all those who've had two jabs we can clearly see the variation by age here, ranging from less than half of under 30s being boosted, to over 90% at older ages.
4/
And here we see progress over the last month, with the rapid acceleration from the middle of the month, the impact of Xmas, and slower progress since.
5/
The govt target was to offer everyone eligible a jab by year end. By having walk-in centres available, it could be argued that's been met, although convenience of both those and booked centres needs to be taken into account, in terms of people's ability to come forward.
6/
And of course the "offer" point covers those who decide that they don't actually want to have a booster - something that is (to some degree) out of the vaccination programme's control, at least in the short term and in the context of the emergency push we've had.
7/
We've still to add today's figures to get a true year end position of those jabbed. But what's clear is that the NHS, staff and volunteers, responded magnificently to the challenge laid down by the PM, and any assessment of the success of the programme should reflect that.
8/8
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A great thread on the state pension and National Insurance.
For me, the trailed abolition of NI and thus its replacement by general taxation in terms of funding state pension benefits will have a major generational redistribution of tax.
It’s been the case that (in aggregate) at any one time the working generation funds the SPs of the retired generation above it.
2/
If the abolition of NI results in an increase (albeit smaller - else why bother) in income tax, whilst those in work will in total be better off, pensioners will be worse off.
3/
The Pensions & Lifetime Savings Association has updated its guide to living costs in retirement. The full report is well worth a read, and goes into a lot of detail.
One key point is that it assumes that pensioners own their home outright - probably reasonable now, but the shift to renting means that in future years that may become increasingly questionable.
2/
It focuses on retirement income, but note that other sources may be used to fund retirement, whether it be income from savings/investments, or gradual withdrawal of capital. Much more likely to be relevant for those aspiring to a comfortable lifestyle of course.
3/
UKHSA estimates that prevalence of COVID in England and Scotland has nearly tripled in the month since the ONS restarted its COVID infection surveillance.
Fortunately prevalence is lowest at the oldest, more vulnerable age groups, but is estimated at just under 6% in the 18 to 44 age groups.
2/
Prevalence is estimated to be highest in the London area, at just over 6% across the population. Note though that confidence intervals are wider due to lower sample sizes than in previous studies.
So with the news this morning that the earnings growth announced today means the state pension (SP) will very likely increase by another 8.5% next year, it's time to set out once again why the SP triple lock (TL) is such a bad idea.
1/
It's all down to cherry-picking the best of the three rates each year. I did a thread nearly a year ago, that hopefully sets out clearly how the mechanism inevitably means that the SP will grow over time against both earnings (E) and prices (P).
With BH's still distorting individual weeks' figures, the cumulative position gives a better view, with the latest CMI age-standardised analysis showing mortality 3.8% (of a full year's mortality) worse than its reference year of 2019.
Here's the mea culpa - it was only wrong by a factor of 13, but at least the post has been deleted rather than just corrected and left up, when experience shows that only a fraction of the original audience will see the correction.
So what are the true numbers?
2/
In E&W the peak week in 2020 was just under 9,000, and the second wave peak was pretty close to that number.
In total ONS has recorded 199,728 COVID related deaths in E&W since the pandemic started.