Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[JuliusHMarx]

First topic message reminder :

How have some individuals got to the point where all they do is whinge and moan and complain about other people without any sense of compassion for those less well off than themselves through no fault of their own?

[super_realist]

Don't comment then.

[JAS]

I'm not sure i care. Just intrigued that you don't let your lack of knowledge or interest in motir racing stop you from making comments on it.

Much as I'm loath to admit it I mostly agree with general thrust of Supers argument re F1 insofar as I see it as a Team engineering competition first and sport as a kind of side issue it just happens to have.

That's not to say there isn't a lot to be admired about F1. Many ideas they come up with in R&D in terms of safety and efficiency eventually feed through into general automotive development so it has a place, I'm just not sure that place is a seat at the top table of sporting prowess.

Regarding the actual "sporting" element, yep fair do's to Hamilton for having that edge and being able to stay at the pinnacle for so long. In reality though isn't it a bit of an SPL as a contest. One maybe 2 dominant teams and once in a while a 3rd or 4th may offer some competition. As each team has a main driver and a support driver that means at the start of the season Hamilton lines up in the best car knowing he's going to be there or thereabouts. A bit different from teeing it up week after week with 150 others, all capable of winning and the equipment in any one persons bag ain't going to make that much difference from the rest of the field.

[super_realist]

I'm not sure i care. Just intrigued that you don't let your lack of knowledge or interest in motir racing stop you from making comments on it.

Someone made a specific point and addressed it to me, why wouldn't I reply?

[JAS]

This is the first thing that's come out of the Biden Camp that surprises me. Surprises me insofar as I seen the Democrats (since Clinton) as being Wall Street Democrats who sold their soul to corporate America. This is the first sign that maybe, just maybe a change is coming.

https://joebiden.com/empowerworkers/

Got to say as well this is the kind of thing Corbyn would have easily enthused about and wanted to bandwagon jump the sentiment. Starmer on the other hand I'd see as having to consult several focus groups to determine if it ok to be ok about this.

[super_realist]

Can't see it JAS, America is very conservative, it even has two parties on the right.

[beninho]

I'm not sure i care. Just intrigued that you don't let your lack of knowledge or interest in motir racing stop you from making comments on it.

Much as I'm loath to admit it I mostly agree with general thrust of Supers argument re  F1 insofar as I see it as a Team engineering competition first and sport as a kind of side issue it just happens to have.

That's not to say there isn't a lot to be admired about F1. Many ideas they come up with in R&D in terms of safety and efficiency eventually feed through into general automotive development so it has a place, I'm just not sure that place is a seat at the top table of sporting prowess.

Regarding the actual "sporting" element, yep fair do's to Hamilton for having that edge and being able to stay at the pinnacle for so long. In reality though isn't it a bit of an SPL as a contest. One maybe 2 dominant teams and once in a while a 3rd or 4th may offer some competition. As each team has a main driver and a support driver that means at the start of the season Hamilton lines up in the best car knowing he's going to be there or thereabouts. A bit different from teeing it up week after week with 150 others, all capable of winning and the equipment in any one persons bag ain't going to make that much difference from the rest of the field.

I'm a massive fan of F1. Have been for years. I think f1 fans generally accept most if what you say, but still enjoy it. Hamilton is in the best car, but he wasn't when he joined them. Drivers are also involved in how a car drives and is designed.

I dont mind people having issues, plenty of sports im not sold on. But, to think its luck that LH is a 7 time world champion, is wrong.

[super_realist]

It's massively about what car you're in though. Vettel dominated too whilst in the best car then Mercedes stepped up the development. 
If you aren't in the best car these days, you simply won't win the championship which is what makes it predictable and boring. When was the last time a driver won a Championship who wasn't in a car which was considerably better than the others? 

I can sort of see why people like it, but is it truly sporting to have 95% of the field incapable of winning? Seems they are only there to make up the numbers for a two horse race. Even the Premiership is more interesting than that. 

Im more interested in the technology that comes out of it than the non event that is "racing" which is stapled on the front of it.

[beninho]

I think Hamilton probably was the last to win in not the best car, when at McLaren as Ferrari won the constructors championship.

But, the best car usually gets tge best driver and wins. Though, who wins the title isn't just what people enjoy it for. Its like following a lower league football team, its more then just winning games.

[McLaren]

When was the last time a driver won a Championship who wasn't in a car which was considerably better than the others? 

Hamilton in 2017 and especially 2018. In 2018 it is widely regarded that the Ferrari was the fastest car. It is just that Vettel went off the boil after crashing out of the lead in Germany.

[Soul Requiem]

When was the last time a driver won a Championship who wasn't in a car which was considerably better than the others? 

Hamilton in 2017 and especially 2018. In 2018 it is widely regarded that the Ferrari was the fastest car. It is just that Vettel went off the boil after crashing out of the lead in Germany.

Hamiltons qualifying lap in Singapore in 2018 is possibly the greatest lap ever produced.

[JAS]

Can't see it JAS, America is very conservative, it even has two parties on the right.

I know, one Right and one very Right. In a way just like here but further Right. When I read it I thought it's more likely to have been written by the Sanders faction of the Party than the Biden camp.

You do wonder at some point though, will the tide turn? The Pandemic has thrown a few curveballs at Western Capitalism and it's fragility has yet again been exposed.

Capitalism lite is fine and tolerable but the insidiously creeping unbridled morally bankrupt greed that has fuelled regimes that have decorated the past 30 years of Capitalism is not and sooner or later the majority of people will wake up to that fact and want a change.

[super_realist]

I think it would only matter if there was an alternative to capitalism, but there isn't.

Let's not forget the entire virus and many other respiratory diseases have their origins within communist countries and have occurred as a result of communist practices. If they were more capitalist and less communist we wouldn't even have this problem to begin with.

[JAS]

I think it would only matter if there was an alternative to capitalism, but there isn't.

Let's not forget the entire virus and many other respiratory diseases have their origins within communist countries and have occurred as a result of communist practices. If they were more capitalist and less communist we wouldn't even have this problem to begin with.

So what you're actually saying is...communism causes viruses?? So was there a small Communist enclave in Dakota in 1918 or did Spanish Flu start somewhere else and jump there somehow?? Honestly Super, that's a right head wobbler of a statement. I'm not sure how you manage to conflate wet markets exclusively with communism either.

Anyway, why should Communism be seen as the only unpalatable alternative to todays corrupt and self serving Corporate neoliberal Capitalism?

There could be Democratic Socialism? (don't act like an American and tell me thats basically Communism)

There could be a kind of Capitalism lite?
In both of the above we could have a position where the societally damaging super greedy B@5tard5 are held more in check by centre/slightly right of centre regimes that have a sense of social responsibility, one that is also open and honest with it's people, one that prioritizes the general improvement of society rather than pandering to despotic and unnecessary greed.

There is nothing wrong with a meritocracy where people have opportunity, I'm all good with that and indeed would like to see that. That's not what we have though is it? What we have is a plutocracy where power wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the few and they decide what crumbs they are prepared to brush off the table to be fought over by everybody else.
I think that a Society where one man can afford to mount a space mission, whilst millions starve and many commit suicide worrying about themselves and their families starving is profoundly unequal and not one to be proud of. A society where most of us have spent the past decade paying for the banker bonuses of the previous decade. No sooner will we have paid that, we'll then be asked to pay for the effects of the Pandemic...the common denominator being guess who...Yep, us the ordinary taxpayer, when are you going to work out that the current flavour of capitalism is programmed to invoice you for all its foibles. Having said that you seem to be quite happy that there isn't an alternative.

[super_realist]

I think it would only matter if there was an alternative to capitalism, but there isn't.

Let's not forget the entire virus and many other respiratory diseases have their origins within communist countries and have occurred as a result of communist practices. If they were more capitalist and less communist we wouldn't even have this problem to begin with.

So what you're actually saying is...communism causes viruses?? So was there a small Communist enclave in Dakota in 1918 or did Spanish Flu start somewhere else and jump there somehow?? Honestly Super, that's a right head wobbler of a statement. I'm not sure how you manage to conflate wet markets exclusively with communism either.

Anyway, why should Communism be seen as the only unpalatable  alternative to todays corrupt and self serving Corporate neoliberal Capitalism?

There could be Democratic Socialism? (don't act like an American and tell me thats basically Communism)

There could be a kind of Capitalism lite?
In both of the above we could have a position where the societally damaging super greedy B@5tard5 are held more in check by centre/slightly right of centre regimes that have a sense of social responsibility, one that is also open and honest with it's people, one that prioritizes the general improvement of society rather than pandering to despotic and unnecessary greed.

There is nothing wrong with a meritocracy where people have opportunity, I'm all good with that and indeed would like to see that. That's not what we have though is it? What we have is a plutocracy where power wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the few and they decide what crumbs they are prepared to brush off the table to be fought over by everybody else.
I think that a Society where one man can afford to mount a space mission, whilst millions starve and many commit suicide worrying about themselves and their families starving is profoundly unequal and not one to be proud of. A society where most of us have spent the past decade paying for the banker bonuses of the previous decade. No sooner will we have paid that, we'll then be asked to pay for the effects of the Pandemic...the common denominator being guess who...Yep, us the ordinary taxpayer, when are you going to work out that the current flavour of capitalism is programmed to invoice you for all its foibles. Having said that you seem to be quite happy that there isn't an alternative.

Please don't do a Beninho, I'm not saying communism causes viruses I didn't even imply it. I'm saying that be careful what you wish for if you want to move away from capitalism, because every single one of the alternatives is worse.

By the way I despise Elon Musk as an individual, but it's absurd to blame him for being wealthy through his own talent and mention others being poor as some sort of cause and effect. 
If Bezoz, Musk, Gates didn't exist, people would still be poor and hungry.

[JAS]

[quote="super_realist"]

I think it would only matter if there was an alternative to capitalism, but there isn't.

Let's not forget the entire virus and many other respiratory diseases have their origins within communist countries and have occurred as a result of communist practices. If they were more capitalist and less communist we wouldn't even have this problem to begin with.

So what you're actually saying is...communism causes viruses?? So was there a small Communist enclave in Dakota in 1918 or did Spanish Flu start somewhere else and jump there somehow?? Honestly Super, that's a right head wobbler of a statement. I'm not sure how you manage to conflate wet markets exclusively with communism either.

Anyway, why should Communism be seen as the only unpalatable  alternative to todays corrupt and self serving Corporate neoliberal Capitalism?

There could be Democratic Socialism? (don't act like an American and tell me thats basically Communism)

There could be a kind of Capitalism lite?
In both of the above we could have a position where the societally damaging super greedy B@5tard5 are held more in check by centre/slightly right of centre regimes that have a sense of social responsibility, one that is also open and honest with it's people, one that prioritizes the general improvement of society rather than pandering to despotic and unnecessary greed.

There is nothing wrong with a meritocracy where people have opportunity, I'm all good with that and indeed would like to see that. That's not what we have though is it? What we have is a plutocracy where power wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the few and they decide what crumbs they are prepared to brush off the table to be fought over by everybody else.
I think that a Society where one man can afford to mount a space mission, whilst millions starve and many commit suicide worrying about themselves and their families starving is profoundly unequal and not one to be proud of. A society where most of us have spent the past decade paying for the banker bonuses of the previous decade. No sooner will we have paid that, we'll then be asked to pay for the effects of the Pandemic...the common denominator being guess who...Yep, us the ordinary taxpayer, when are you going to work out that the current flavour of capitalism is programmed to invoice you for all its foibles. Having said that you seem to be quite happy that there isn't an alternative.

Please don't do a Beninho, I'm not saying communism causes viruses I didn't even imply it. I'm saying that be careful what you wish for if you want to move away from capitalism, because every single one of the alternatives is worse.

Ahem...quote...
"Let's not forget the entire virus and many other respiratory diseases have their origins within communist countries and have occurred as a result of communist practices. If they were more capitalist and less communist we wouldn't even have this problem to begin with."

I'd suggest there's most definitely an implication there

By the way I despise Elon Musk as an individual, but it's absurd to blame him for being wealthy through his own talent and mention others being poor as some sort of cause and effect. 
If Bezoz, Musk, Gates didn't exist, people would still be poor and hungry.

Who said anything about blaming him, I'm not attacking him I'm attacking the system that allows such inequality to exist. Following up with the others confirms once again that you totally miss the point. All those guys are super rich and have worked hard and taken the opportunities that have taken them to the tops of their respective industries. That's meritocratic and fair enough. Did they directly cause poverty and starvation in others well no but indirectly probably yes. At some point they crossed the line from being meritocrats to plutocrats. They and their companies are ALL aggressive tax avoiders (illegal no, but morally repugnant and not conducive to the kind of society we should be aspiring to - hell yes). They ALL embrace the globalisation of labour (aka moving jobs to where they can be done cheapest with workers having least protection).

Just like the Bankers and others in the last couple of decades, the more the haves take the piss and game the system to satisfy their greed and get away with it, the more pissed off the have nots will become. Eventually balance/redress will have to come. What is really fascinating is that what the haves have mostly managed to do for the last couple of decades is hide the slide toward ridiculous inequality, there will come a point where that will no longer be possible. It really would be better for western capitalism if it gently back-pedalled from it's current greed driven norms.To continue down the current road will lead to something having to give. I'm sure the comparison has been done to death but it is still relevant
1929 Financial crash followed by a decade of Austerity, resulting in the rise of Fascism and eventually? WW2.
2008 Financial crash followed by a decade of Austerity, resulting in? Yep, a rise in Fascism/Isolationism/Separatism....if we can't see the parallels and take the appropriate action then at least we know where we're headed.

[super_realist]

You really are bordering on the edge of tin foil hat conspiracies.
If you seriously think that your perceived "rise in fascism", for which you don't actually have any evidence is in any way comparable to 1930's Germany, Italy or Spain then you are even more deluded than I thought.

In the case of Germany at least, fascism didn't follow a decade of austerity caused by the crash of 1929 as you claim, Fascism was rising there before the 1930's and Hitler came into power as Chancellor in 1933 and to compare even flippantly that time to today is insulting to all of those who were victims of that regime. 

Also, if you think other economic systems aren't capable of extreme poverty and crashing in ways which can be even worse then again you are just being myopic.

[super_realist]

Own goal by Labour letting Corbyn back in. Makes them look very weak and signals they aren't moving on.

[I'm never wrong]

JAS - have you seen the "My Little Crony" map?

[navyblueshorts]

Don't get surrealist of on his f1 hatred.

I don't hate it, it's just a boring engineering competition.

Man not keen on something he doesn't like. Wants to tell the world. OK. We get it, its not for you. Though you seem to like to talk about how much its not for you.

You brought it up and almost invited him to respond.

[navyblueshorts]

I think it would only matter if there was an alternative to capitalism, but there isn't.

Let's not forget the entire virus and many other respiratory diseases have their origins within communist countries and have occurred as a result of communist practices. If they were more capitalist and less communist we wouldn't even have this problem to begin with.

Ebola outbreaks? MERS? It's not a Communist thing, it's a deprivation thing and/or a capitalist thing that's leading to deforestation and increasing contact between man and the species that carry these contagions.

[navyblueshorts]

You really are bordering on the edge of tin foil hat conspiracies.
If you seriously think that your perceived "rise in fascism", for which you don't actually have any evidence is in any way comparable to 1930's Germany, Italy or Spain then you are even more deluded than I thought.

In the case of Germany at least, fascism didn't follow a decade of austerity caused by the crash of 1929 as you claim, Fascism was rising there before the 1930's and Hitler came into power as Chancellor in 1933 and to compare even flippantly that time to today is insulting to all of those who were victims of that regime. 

Also, if you think other economic systems aren't capable of extreme poverty and crashing in ways which can be even worse then again you are just being myopic.

Fascism in Weimar Germany was given oxygen by the depression that followed the Versailles Treaty in 1919 and the requirement for Germany to give up territories and make absurdly high reparations for WWI. In addition, they never thought their armies were actually defeated in WWI.

[super_realist]

That might be, but that's not what JAS claimed, either way its an absurd comparison to equate fascism in Europe in the 1930's with today. Just utterly ridiculous.

[navyblueshorts]

That might be, but that's not what JAS claimed, either way its an absurd comparison to equate fascism in Europe in the 1930's with today. Just utterly ridiculous.

I disagree. JAS is painting a picture of what might lead to something similar. He didn't say it actually would. Hopefully, we've learned enough to avoid a repeat, but we're 75 years away from the end of WWII now and don't ever underestimate how dumb humanity can be.

[super_realist]

He said there was a rise in fascism and isolationism and I just don't see that on any sort of significant scale.

[McLaren]

I just don't see that on any sort of significant scale.

I don't think anyone on here was expecting you to.

[super_realist]

I just don't see that on any sort of significant scale.

I don't think anyone on here was expecting you to.

Demonstrate that there is fascism on a significant scale comparable to the Nazi Party Mac. I await your reply.

[McLaren]

The point was that the far right are on the raise, and moving towards pre war tendencies (not having arrived there just yet). So I guess it is trivial to pick a point when the current situation matches a similar point for the Nazi party. Could be day one it could be the firing up of the first gas chamber. As long as they are comparable.

[super_realist]

We are nothing even remotely close to pre war conditions. 
Try reading a book or watching a documentary to pre war Germany.
Where is this main source of fascism you are so terrified of? I suspect you are equating things with fascism that are nothing of the sort.

[navyblueshorts]

He said there was a rise in fascism and isolationism and I just don't see that on any sort of significant scale.

No, perhaps not. Another parallel with the 1930s then.

[navyblueshorts]

I just don't see that on any sort of significant scale.

I don't think anyone on here was expecting you to.

Demonstrate that there is fascism on a significant scale comparable to the Nazi Party Mac. I await your reply.

You've extrapolated too far again. No-one was making any comparison between current nations/political parties and the fully fledged NSDAP of the late 1930s/1940s. What's being posited is that conditions are such that we could see the rise of something leading to war again, based on nationalism/xenophobia. I hope nothing like that happens, but it wouldn't take much and I think it's a fool that dismisses all possibility of such. Srebrenica etc, for example, wasn't that long ago - I wonder if Trump would have backed US involvement in dealing w/ Milosovic etc in the same way as Clinton(?) did?

[super_realist]

JAS made a direct comparison to that era.

[McLaren]

Super

For something to be a comparison it doesn't have to be an exact replica. There are no two periods in history that are exactly the same but it is common practice to draw parallels between different time periods.

[JAS]

That might be, but that's not what JAS claimed, either way its an absurd comparison to equate fascism in Europe in the 1930's with today. Just utterly ridiculous.

I didn't "claim" anything, I illustrated a comparison, people can make up their own minds whether there is any validity in the comparison.

You do seem particularly spiky about the comparison though, I don't think it's absurd or ridiculous at all. Just because Fascism isn't at the level now that it was in the late 30s you think it's absurd? Yes Fascism was on the rise in the 20s so do you think the financial crash of 1929 and the mass unemployment & deprivation that followed helped slow that rise or exacerbate it or made no difference?

Don't you think Fascism is on the rise today (albeit from a low level)? Some of the more zealous white supremacist Trump supporters? Tommy and his merry band of marching idiots here? Italy and Germany also have their issues. Would you rather we all waited until it was too late (again!!) before it was tackled.

[super_realist]

I don't think you are using fascism in the same context as what it was in Nazi Germany that's the point.
We had a lot more issues with the National Front, BNP and racism in the 1970's and 1980's than we do now. 
Where's the equivalent of Enoch Powell or Mosley now?

[McLaren]

 
Where's the equivalent of Enoch Powell or Mosley now?

In Government or helping to win Brexit.

[super_realist]

 
Where's the equivalent of Enoch Powell or Mosley now?

In Government or helping to win Brexit.

Thats a perfect demonstration of not understanding what fascism is Mac, well done.

[McLaren]

Super

You are correct, no one in the current UK government is an Italian ultranationalist. But what you will find is that the term has taken on a modern more colloquial meaning.

[super_realist]

Super

You are correct, no one in the current UK government is an Italian ultranationalist. But what you will find is that the term has taken on a modern more colloquial meaning.

So stop trying to compare it to 1930's Germany. It seems that too many from the far left call anyone that doesn't agree with them fascist, where in fact in terms of being intolerant it is actually the far left which are most close to the standard definition of fascism in terms of their intolerance.

[navyblueshorts]

Super

You are correct, no one in the current UK government is an Italian ultranationalist. But what you will find is that the term has taken on a modern more colloquial meaning.

Daft. If this really is so, that's cheapening and trivialising it, thereby damaging the argument you might want to make. Ditto re. racism, sexism and any other issue of merit.

[super_realist]

Super

You are correct, no one in the current UK government is an Italian ultranationalist. But what you will find is that the term has taken on a modern more colloquial meaning.

Daft. If this really is so, that's cheapening and trivialising it, thereby damaging the argument you might want to make. Ditto re. racism, sexism and any other issue of merit.

Exactly, its a bit like the modern definition of poverty. It's nothing like the grainy images of the gorbals we associate it with.

[JAS]

Own goal by Labour letting Corbyn back in. Makes them look very weak and signals they aren't moving on.

To you obviously...

If they had have booted him out you would have had a different narrative painting them as divided and unable to move on.

Either way Captain Obvious, we all know you despise the Labour Party, you're like a drunk uncle at a family gathering...dragging up the same repetitive Poopie time after time.

In the grand scheme of things, does it really make any difference? Personally I think he should quietly retire. He carried the torch and burnt his hands. He wasn't equipped with the required leadership qualities to actually implement real (and required) change. He's been out of leadership for over 6 months now, why is anything he does important to you, come to think of it why are the media STILL stirring Poopie around him. If I were him I'd slope off into the sunset, enjoy retirement and forget politics.

[super_realist]

I don't despise the Labour Party actually, but I do despise the way it was going under Corbyn, just as you probably did.

Why is it important that people are still taking about him? Isn't that obvious? Him hanging around like a fart in a lift is causing damage to there being an effective and cohesive opposition.

The media don't need to stir anything, he does that himself.
I want to see an effective centre left party, but with momentum and Corbyn still associated with the party, what chance is there of that?

[JAS]

I don't despise the Labour Party actually, but I do despise the way it was going under Corbyn, just as you probably did.

Why is it important that people are still taking about him? Isn't that obvious? Him hanging around like a fart in a lift is causing damage to there being an effective and cohesive opposition.

The media don't need to stir anything, he does that himself.
I want to see an effective centre left party, but with momentum and Corbyn still associated with the party, what chance is there of that?

Well join and make a difference then instead of carping from the sidelines that they're forever doomed.

I thought he had the right ideas on a lot of things but he was NEVER going to get to implement anywhere near to what he would have wanted to do. Partly because his leadership qualities were lacking and partly because I don't think the country collectively is sick enough of they way we're being run yet to embrace such radical change.

[super_realist]

Or that Corbyns take on socialism isn't something this country will ever vote for.
The only way that Labour are ever going to get in again is if they adopt a centre left stance. There's no other way they will get in, you know that. 
Corbyn wasn't helped by surrounding himself with loons like McDonnel, RLB and Abbot..

[Soul Requiem]

Either way Captain Obvious, we all know you despise the Labour Party, you're like a drunk uncle at a family gathering...dragging up the same repetitive Poopie time after time.

Like your drunken anti capitalist rants then?

[JAS]

Either way Captain Obvious, we all know you despise the Labour Party, you're like a drunk uncle at a family gathering...dragging up the same repetitive Poopie time after time.

Like your drunken anti capitalist rants then?

1. They get done sober
2. They're not really anti capitalist per se although that's probably how they come across. The compass has drifted so far right that trying to extol the virtues of a mixed market economy sounds old school Socialist to some and downright commie to others.

[super_realist]

Just as the left isn't communist, I think it's a stretch to say we are under a far right government. I think you just perceive it as far right. Hardly Republican America is it?

Seeks trendy to label anything right of centre as being far right these days when in reality it isn't.

[Soul Requiem]

Either way Captain Obvious, we all know you despise the Labour Party, you're like a drunk uncle at a family gathering...dragging up the same repetitive Poopie time after time.

Like your drunken anti capitalist rants then?

1. They get done sober
2. They're not really anti capitalist per se although that's probably how they come across. The compass has drifted so far right that trying to extol the virtues of a mixed market economy sounds old school Socialist to some and downright commie to others.

I preferred being under the impression you were drunk JAS.

[dynamark]

Corbyn is poison to labour and Starmer knows it.
Interesting to see govt back on 3 last few days trying to be open and Morgan being his usual rude and all knowing self .Finally F1 is excessive but ultimately brilliant to see the level of skill,technology.expertise I could go on if you ever get the chance to get real up close you may have a different view.Its a bit like space travel on this planet !

[I'm never wrong]

Anyone else aware that we (hopefully) come out of lockdown in England on Thursday 3rd December and not Wednesday 2nd? From the Government website The new measures will apply nationally for four weeks up to and including Wednesday 2 December. At the end of that period, we will return to a regional approach, based on the latest data.

[Sponsored content]