How about the idea that I'm factoring in my personal situation in regards to my hesitancy, whereas the government is using generalised statistics to factor risk?

For example, I have great hesitancy over taking the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine due to rare blood clotting. The odds of it causing a blood clot in my (male, 27) are extremely low, however, the odds of suffering serious symptoms from catching covid-19 are even lower. I can make this decision as I know I am in better physical shape than the average male for the UK. The government would make the argument that the average male in his late 20s in the UK is at higher risk of falling seriously ill from catching covid-19, however, the average male in his late 20s in the UK typically has a much higher BMI than I do, which is a leading risk factor in long term health issues stemming from catching the virus.

TL;DR: the average male of my age is at risk of coming in to harm by not taking that specific vaccine, however I surmise personally that due to my individual physiology my odds of coming into harm from the Oxford AZ vaccine (albeit still unbelievably small) are higher than the odds of being harmed by the virus.

Of course you can make the herd immunity argument, and I understand the social responsibility of being vaccinated, but respecting individual freedoms given the small risks we now know about certain vaccines I believe the choice of the individual should be respected.

If presented with a different variant of the vaccine that doesn't offer the same risk, I would gladly have it.