The plan was initially to have 4 million people vaccinated by early April and everybody else by October.

We are in early April but, on the latest figures, only 841,885 Australians had been given either the AstraZeneca or the Pfizer jab. A deficit of 3 million protected Australians is there at the very first milestone.

On top of that, last week's advice from the chief medical officer Paul Kelly that people under 50 should not receive the AstraZeneca vaccine unless the "benefit clearly outweighed the risk" will clearly slow the rollout.

There will no doubt be a debate about who is responsible for the delay. It will be a rerun of the usual "blame game" which may or may not be helpful.

The suspects are legion - particularly the European Union, which seems to be playing politics to cover up its own shortcomings. It ordered too little of the vaccine too late, and now finds itself vaccinating at a much lower rate than the United Kingdom, for example.

If the federal government in Canberra takes the credit for the way Australia has avoided the worst effects of the pandemic, should it not also take the blame when the rollout of the vaccine is slower than elsewhere?

But there are more important questions than those raised in the current cut and thrust of blame politics, particularly: how does the slower return to relative normality affect the economy?

It is clear that while the pandemic exists, any large-scale visit by tourists and their dollars is unlikely.

The border will remain closed.

While Australians are still capable of being struck down by COVID-19, no return to a thriving, full-throttle economy is likely. Businesses associated with tourism - the so-called hospitality industry, meaning hotels and restaurants - will see lacklustre business for many months, quite possibly into next year.

The end of JobKeeper will mean an important prop is removed. At the end of March, when the $90 billion scheme ended, nearly 1 million Australians lost the subsidy that kept them in employment.

When this dreadful pandemic started more than a year ago, the economic prospects looked awful. Nobody doubted forecasts of doom.

In the event, because of wise government economic policy, unemployment peaked at "only" 7.5 per cent. It has fallen to 5.8 per cent.

People in hospitality may be wondering if the fall will continue.

One of the dangers of a lengthening schedule for emerging from the pandemic is that economic confidence may be dented.

We can all hunker down and make a sacrifice if the end is in sight, but it's much harder if the light at the end of the tunnel keeps turning out to be illusionary.

One of the good things to come out of the past year is the re-emergence of Keynesian economics: the idea that governments borrow to keep personal and business spending up when it threatens to collapse.

The "deficit scolds" who for 30 years warned that government borrowing would lead to disaster have been shown to be wrong. Like in a war, borrowing to stop the collapse of an economy works.

At the very least, the government should recognise that truth. It should not start trying to cut expenditure to cut a deficit which is already low by international standards.

It might also consider continuing to borrow to spend for longer.

And if it was thinking of an election this year, it should think again.