Ladies and gentlemen - can I suggest a cordon sanitaire around Mr Meeks?
This thread abundantly shows that he is experiencing Brexit as some kind of terrible personal cataclysm. There is no other reasonable explanation for the sheer volume and intensity of the bile and hatred he spews, not just at 17.4 million of his compatriots, but at well-intentioned people on PB who have spent hours trying to engage with him. All he offers in return is poison.
There is nothing to be gained by engaging with him.
I believe the cordon sanitaire you are describing is more usually known as a "safe space", and the activity you are engaged in as "no platforming". Such things are usually deprecated on PB.
Bottom line in any deal Mrs May gets - it delivers what the EU27 want. As they want ongoing, guaranteed protection for EU citizens currently resident in the UK based on the rights they currently enjoy that’s what there will be.
As long as it ends FOM then fine
Not if it does so in name only.
It won't, it will be replaced by a work permits system
Looks a good night for Theresa May, DUP inching towards agreement with the UK, Irish Government and the EU on the Irish border
Agreed. Let us hope it continues.
Looks like 3 nil to the EU in the first round, and the PB Tories are eager for trade talks to start before DD does his homework or May has a cabinet level discussion on destination.
There is UK blood in the water and the sharks closing. What could possibly go wrong on trade talks?
Bottom line in any deal Mrs May gets - it delivers what the EU27 want. As they want ongoing, guaranteed protection for EU citizens currently resident in the UK based on the rights they currently enjoy that’s what there will be.
As long as it ends FOM then fine
Not if it does so in name only.
How do you end it in name only?
By agreeing that people can come to the UK if they have a job offer. Or a system whereby people somehow qualify for a permit without having to apply for one. This is FOM.
A permit system, where permits have to be granted, are limited in number and not obtained automatically, would not be FOM.
I think there is every chance that May will end up conceding a system which is really FOM but made to look a bit different.
Looks a good night for Theresa May, DUP inching towards agreement with the UK, Irish Government and the EU on the Irish border
Looks like another defeat to me. Is she REALLY going to agree to ECJ oversight for another ten years??
We'll have been a member for 46 years by the time we leave, and we had a 6 or 7 year transition when we joined.
It's a long sentence, but not for life
So on that basis, Leavers would be happy with another 10 years of FoM?
We might get a little hot under the collar, but whatever it takes...
This totally depends on what has been agreed. If, as politico reported, the referrals to the ECJ are voluntary and the UKSC only has to have 'due regard' to their decision (rather than it being binding) then May will probably get away with it. Voluntary referral and regard can be played as maintenance of UK sovereignty and the sunset clause will help her sell it.
If there is any indication that ECJ decisions are binding, she will get in serious trouble as this is clearly not compatible with her promise on sovereignty - in this case 10 years would be seen as way too long.
What will be interesting is, if the former is the agreement, how the European Parliament will cope.
Looks a good night for Theresa May, DUP inching towards agreement with the UK, Irish Government and the EU on the Irish border
Agreed. Let us hope it continues.
Looks like 3 nil to the EU in the first round, and the PB Tories are eager for trade talks to start before DD does his homework or May has a cabinet level discussion on destination.
There is UK blood in the water and the sharks closing. What could possibly go wrong on trade talks?
I have always been in favour of no deal. However, depending on the detail of the agreement, it is not true that the EU will have gotten everything they asked for.
IF ECJ judgements are not binding, then the EU and the EU Parliament backed down. I personally think that we should have refused any involvement, but it would be wrong to claim this as a win for the EU.
On money, the EU wanted a lump sum settlement and the reports are that they have not received this. IF there is a clear expression that the money is tied to a trade deal, the UK have not won nothing. Again, I would have paid nothing.
On NI, if the agreement is on regulatory equivalence the UK has conceded nothing of value - this is a requirement for CETA. Regulatory alignment is completely different and would indeed by a abject surrender.
Overall I prefer no deal because I don't think the EU can offer us anything useful in trade talks and that by going down this path we will run out of time and get stuck with a terrible outcome. But it is not NECESSARILY true that the UK have achieved nothing in Stage 1 - it is very dependent on the detailed text.
I find it touching that people think a future Labour government wont extend the ECJ jurisdiction past 2019.
Good night.
It will be in the secession treaty. Good luck amending that.
And the EU wont be willing to extend the ECJ's jurisdiction in the UK via a new treaty?
Bless.
You think Corbyn wants ECJ jurisdiction over his nationalisation programme and exchange controls?
Bless your heart.
Unlike puppies for Christmas, Corbyn isn't forever.
Plus Labour's Brexit Secretary this week talked about remaining in the single market and customs union.
Corbyn is not going to do that and allow free movement and annoy Labour Leavers and ECJ jurisdiction over nationalisation etc and he is likely to be around for up to a decade
Looks a good night for Theresa May, DUP inching towards agreement with the UK, Irish Government and the EU on the Irish border
Agreed. Let us hope it continues.
Looks like 3 nil to the EU in the first round, and the PB Tories are eager for trade talks to start before DD does his homework or May has a cabinet level discussion on destination.
There is UK blood in the water and the sharks closing. What could possibly go wrong on trade talks?
I have always been in favour of no deal. However, depending on the detail of the agreement, it is not true that the EU will have gotten everything they asked for.
IF ECJ judgements are not binding, then the EU and the EU Parliament backed down. I personally think that we should have refused any involvement, but it would be wrong to claim this as a win for the EU.
On money, the EU wanted a lump sum settlement and the reports are that they have not received this. IF there is a clear expression that the money is tied to a trade deal, the UK have not won nothing. Again, I would have paid nothing.
On NI, if the agreement is on regulatory equivalence the UK has conceded nothing of value - this is a requirement for CETA. Regulatory alignment is completely different and would indeed by a abject surrender.
Overall I prefer no deal because I don't think the EU can offer us anything useful in trade talks and that by going down this path we will run out of time and get stuck with a terrible outcome. But it is not NECESSARILY true that the UK have achieved nothing in Stage 1 - it is very dependent on the detailed text.
The red lines on payment (go whistle!), ECJ and now the Irish border have all gone the EU27 way. What is the next capitulation?
Tough negotiators in the EU and unlike our clowns they have done their homework. Any trade deal will be by supremely informed and disciplined EU vs shambolic lazy mendacious UK negotiators. Its like the secondary school third XI vs Manchester United.
As far as I remember, the govt's position was always that we'd pay what we owed, regardless of a trade deal. That amounts to 25-65bn euros, depending on how it's calculcated. Apparently they've agreed on 30.
Looks a good night for Theresa May, DUP inching towards agreement with the UK, Irish Government and the EU on the Irish border
Agreed. Let us hope it continues.
Looks like 3 nil to the EU in the first round, and the PB Tories are eager for trade talks to start before DD does his homework or May has a cabinet level discussion on destination.
There is UK blood in the water and the sharks closing. What could possibly go wrong on trade talks?
I have always been in favour of no deal. However, depending on the detail of the agreement, it is not true that the EU will have gotten everything they asked for.
IF ECJ judgements are not binding, then the EU and the EU Parliament backed down. I personally think that we should have refused any involvement, but it would be wrong to claim this as a win for the EU.
On money, the EU wanted a lump sum settlement and the reports are that they have not received this. IF there is a clear expression that the money is tied to a trade deal, the UK have not won nothing. Again, I would have paid nothing.
On NI, if the agreement is on regulatory equivalence the UK has conceded nothing of value - this is a requirement for CETA. Regulatory alignment is completely different and would indeed by a abject surrender.
Overall I prefer no deal because I don't think the EU can offer us anything useful in trade talks and that by going down this path we will run out of time and get stuck with a terrible outcome. But it is not NECESSARILY true that the UK have achieved nothing in Stage 1 - it is very dependent on the detailed text.
The red lines on payment (go whistle!), ECJ and now the Irish border have all gone the EU27 way. What is the next capitulation?
Tough negotiators in the EU and unlike our clowns they have done their homework. Any trade deal will be by supremely informed and disciplined EU vs shambolic lazy mendacious UK negotiators. Its like the secondary school third XI vs Manchester United.
The ECJ will only have jurisdiction on EU citizens in the UK
I find it touching that people think a future Labour government wont extend the ECJ jurisdiction past 2019.
Good night.
It will be in the secession treaty. Good luck amending that.
And the EU wont be willing to extend the ECJ's jurisdiction in the UK via a new treaty?
Bless.
You think Corbyn wants ECJ jurisdiction over his nationalisation programme and exchange controls?
Bless your heart.
Unlike puppies for Christmas, Corbyn isn't forever.
Plus Labour's Brexit Secretary this week talked about remaining in the single market and customs union.
Corbyn is not going to do that and allow free movement and annoy Labour Leavers and ECJ jurisdiction over nationalisation etc and he is likely to be around for up to a decade
Corbyn is a big fan of free movement.
It's other things he doesn't like.
Personally he does not have a problem with it, politically he does because of Labour Leavers. Personally he has a problem with the single market and ECJ but politically he has to deal with Labour Remainers who support the EEA.
Looks a good night for Theresa May, DUP inching towards agreement with the UK, Irish Government and the EU on the Irish border
Agreed. Let us hope it continues.
Looks like 3 nil to the EU in the first round, and the PB Tories are eager for trade talks to start before DD does his homework or May has a cabinet level discussion on destination.
There is UK blood in the water and the sharks closing. What could possibly go wrong on trade talks?
I have always been in favour of no deal. However, depending on the detail of the agreement, it is not true that the EU will have gotten everything they asked for.
IF ECJ judgements are not binding, then the EU and the EU Parliament backed down. I personally think that we should have refused any involvement, but it would be wrong to claim this as a win for the EU.
On money, the EU wanted a lump sum settlement and the reports are that they have not received this. IF there is a clear expression that the money is tied to a trade deal, the UK have not won nothing. Again, I would have paid nothing.
On NI, if the agreement is on regulatory equivalence the UK has conceded nothing of value - this is a requirement for CETA. Regulatory alignment is completely different and would indeed by a abject surrender.
Overall I prefer no deal because I don't think the EU can offer us anything useful in trade talks and that by going down this path we will run out of time and get stuck with a terrible outcome. But it is not NECESSARILY true that the UK have achieved nothing in Stage 1 - it is very dependent on the detailed text.
The red lines on payment (go whistle!), ECJ and now the Irish border have all gone the EU27 way. What is the next capitulation?
Tough negotiators in the EU and unlike our clowns they have done their homework. Any trade deal will be by supremely informed and disciplined EU vs shambolic lazy mendacious UK negotiators. Its like the secondary school third XI vs Manchester United.
I think you're entirely driven by your motivation for Brexit to fail (in your terms) and you interpret every development from a position of assuming the EU negotiators are ace and ours are crap. Shades of grey apply but you are a black and white kinda guy. Your crystal ball gazing may be spot on (do you have one?) but I hope you pitch in on our side going forward if it doesn't go your way.
I find it touching that people think a future Labour government wont extend the ECJ jurisdiction past 2019.
Good night.
It will be in the secession treaty. Good luck amending that.
And the EU wont be willing to extend the ECJ's jurisdiction in the UK via a new treaty?
Bless.
You think Corbyn wants ECJ jurisdiction over his nationalisation programme and exchange controls?
Bless your heart.
Unlike puppies for Christmas, Corbyn isn't forever.
Plus Labour's Brexit Secretary this week talked about remaining in the single market and customs union.
Corbyn is not going to do that and allow free movement and annoy Labour Leavers and ECJ jurisdiction over nationalisation etc and he is likely to be around for up to a decade
Corbyn is a big fan of free movement.
It's other things he doesn't like.
Personally he does not have a problem with it, politically he does because of Labour Leavers. Personally he has a problem with the single market and ECJ but politically he has to deal with Labour Remainers who support the EEA.
One Remain Tory on here he could be aiming those words at ;-)
He's simply putting in play something ignored by many; people are drive by many factors, some are more understandable than others. Self interest is unattractive.
Looks a good night for Theresa May, DUP inching towards agreement with the UK, Irish Government and the EU on the Irish border
Agreed. Let us hope it continues.
Looks like 3 nil to the EU in the first round, and the PB Tories are eager for trade talks to start before DD does his homework or May has a cabinet level discussion on destination.
There is UK blood in the water and the sharks closing. What could possibly go wrong on trade talks?
I have always been in favour of no deal. However, depending on the detail of the agreement, it is not true that the EU will have gotten everything they asked for.
IF ECJ judgements are not binding, then the EU and the EU Parliament backed down. I personally think that we should have refused any involvement, but it would be wrong to claim this as a win for the EU.
On money, the EU wanted a lump sum settlement and the reports are that they have not received this. IF there is a clear expression that the money is tied to a trade deal, the UK have not won nothing. Again, I would have paid nothing.
On NI, if the agreement is on regulatory equivalence the UK has conceded nothing of value - this is a requirement for CETA. Regulatory alignment is completely different and would indeed by a abject surrender.
Overall I prefer no deal because I don't think the EU can offer us anything useful in trade talks and that by going down this path we will run out of time and get stuck with a terrible outcome. But it is not NECESSARILY true that the UK have achieved nothing in Stage 1 - it is very dependent on the detailed text.
The red lines on payment (go whistle!), ECJ and now the Irish border have all gone the EU27 way. What is the next capitulation?
Tough negotiators in the EU and unlike our clowns they have done their homework. Any trade deal will be by supremely informed and disciplined EU vs shambolic lazy mendacious UK negotiators. Its like the secondary school third XI vs Manchester United.
The ECJ will only have jurisdiction on EU citizens in the UK
They better not have! We have not been told about jurisdiction at all. We have been told that there is some voluntary referral system from the UKSC. Bit of a difference.
Looks a good night for Theresa May, DUP inching towards agreement with the UK, Irish Government and the EU on the Irish border
Agreed. Let us hope it continues.
Looks like 3 nil to the EU in the first round, and the PB Tories are eager for trade talks to start before DD does his homework or May has a cabinet level discussion on destination.
There is UK blood in the water and the sharks closing. What could possibly go wrong on trade talks?
I have always been in favour of no deal. However, depending on the detail of the agreement, it is not true that the EU will have gotten everything they asked for.
IF ECJ judgements are not binding, then the EU and the EU Parliament backed down. I personally think that we should have refused any involvement, but it would be wrong to claim this as a win for the EU.
On money, the EU wanted a lump sum settlement and the reports are that they have not received this. IF there is a clear expression that the money is tied to a trade deal, the UK have not won nothing. Again, I would have paid nothing.
On NI, if the agreement is on regulatory equivalence the UK has conceded nothing of value - this is a requirement for CETA. Regulatory alignment is completely different and would indeed by a abject surrender.
Overall I prefer no deal because I don't think the EU can offer us anything useful in trade talks and that by going down this path we will run out of time and get stuck with a terrible outcome. But it is not NECESSARILY true that the UK have achieved nothing in Stage 1 - it is very dependent on the detailed text.
The red lines on payment (go whistle!), ECJ and now the Irish border have all gone the EU27 way. What is the next capitulation?
Tough negotiators in the EU and unlike our clowns they have done their homework. Any trade deal will be by supremely informed and disciplined EU vs shambolic lazy mendacious UK negotiators. Its like the secondary school third XI vs Manchester United.
The Irish border has gone the EU's way? Er, isn't that the same was that HMG wanted?
And did the EU really want time-limited jurisdiction (or whatever you want to call it)? I suspect they were after more than that.
Bottom line in any deal Mrs May gets - it delivers what the EU27 want. As they want ongoing, guaranteed protection for EU citizens currently resident in the UK based on the rights they currently enjoy that’s what there will be.
After ten years they'll just be rounded up and kicked out.
For the first time, entire rounds of Premier League matches will be shown live under the next UK broadcast deal, Telegraph Sport can reveal.
The games will be broadcast in midweek and on Bank Holidays. Saturday night matches will also be up for grabs, pitching live football against the likes of Strictly Come Dancing and The X Factor in the battle for a share of the massive and lucrative weekend audience.
The world’s richest league on Thursday night issued the tender document for the television rights to its fixtures for the 2019-22 seasons, a copy of which has been seen by Telegraph Sport.
It can be revealed that the league will make 200 of its 380 matches a year available, 42 more than at present, with three rounds of midweek and one of Bank Holiday games accounting for all but two of the additional fixtures.
The 2019 season will also herald the advent of regular Saturday night Premier League football, with eight matches per season on offer under a three-year contract in which clubs are targeting an increase in the eye-watering £5.14 billion they secured from Sky Sports and BT Sport for the existing rights.
Surely better for them to just abandon the 3pm Saturday nonsense and just show the games on TV that people are watching online anyway. Or watching live on TV in loads of other countries. Saturday night matches could be an interesting experiment though, no doubt the cause of many household arguments!
The mood is decisively moving towards NO BREXIT. Thanks, Theresa !
Citation required.
On the other hand, those who know what they're talking about, say:
One strand of comment that has been common amongst those who oppose Britain’s withdrawal from the EU is that when the alleged difficulties and consequences of Brexit become clear to voters they will come to regret the decision to Leave – or at least will wish to sue for a soft Brexit. The experience of the last six months suggests this logic may be faulty......
Rather than coming to the conclusion that the progress of the Brexit process so far means they came to the wrong decision about the EU, it seems that Leave voters are inclined to the view that those responsible for the process – including the EU as well as the UK government – are (from their perspective) failing to make progress towards the kind of future arrangement that they would largely still like to see. In short, they blame the actors in the Brexit process not the act of leaving itself. If the talks about Brexit continue to be difficult and if the economy does indeed begin to suffer, we should not presume that voters in Britain will change their minds about the merits of Brexit. Rather they may simply blame politicians - on both sides of the channel – for their apparent failure to deliver what those who voted for Leave have all along said they want.
The red lines on payment (go whistle!), ECJ and now the Irish border have all gone the EU27 way. What is the next capitulation?
Tough negotiators in the EU and unlike our clowns they have done their homework. Any trade deal will be by supremely informed and disciplined EU vs shambolic lazy mendacious UK negotiators. Its like the secondary school third XI vs Manchester United.
Those weren't the red lines though, were they.
Boris may have made a responded to Peter Bone's suggestion that the EU should "go whistle" (I forget the exact quote, but he said something like 'if some of the numbers that are being quoted in the press are right, then I think they could be deemed exorbitant and, if so, then the honourable member's terminology might be appropriate') but that was never the negotiating position. It was always "we will meet our liabilities in full and are willing to make a contribution in return for a trade deal"
We may have achieved this (depends on the detail)
ECJ - this is the biggest issue, but the red line is removing the ECJ's overarching role over all UK law. This has been achieved. I don't like any ECJ involvement (I generally have a thing about extraterritoriality) but if it is - as reported - by reference only and for a time limited period then I can live with it.
On the Irish border - equivalence would be a fantastic win for the UK. Regulatory alignment in certain sectors based on decisions by Stormont is fine. A commitment to "no divergence" is not acceptable.
If you actually looked at the detail rather than relying on headlines you'd see that both sides have compromised - as you'd expect in any tough negotiation.
1/4 mile 8.8 sec Top Speed Over 250 mph Wheel Torque 10,000 Nm Range 620 miles
That's just straight line bullshit. It's the time round the 'ring that really counts for production car bragging rights. Could it get anywhere near the current Ringmeister (GT2 RS @ 6m 47s).
One of the lasting images of election night this year was George Osborne in the ITV studios. As the exit poll was announced, his face first turned to shock and then to undisguised pleasure as he pronounced Theresa May a “dead woman walking”. The longer the night went on, the more jubilant he became. By the time the last few results came in, the former chancellor and now editor of the Evening Standard – among half a dozen other well-paid jobs – was all but standing on the table in the studio shouting “loser, loser” at the prime minister’s tear-stained face on the TV monitor.
The smile has barely left his face since. George is a man hell-bent on squeezing every bit of enjoyment out of his revenge. Scarcely a day goes by in the pages of his newspaper without him putting the boot into the woman who sacked him.
Comments
Right. BED.
There is UK blood in the water and the sharks closing. What could possibly go wrong on trade talks?
A permit system, where permits have to be granted, are limited in number and not obtained automatically, would not be FOM.
I think there is every chance that May will end up conceding a system which is really FOM but made to look a bit different.
Trying to get the new nickname stuck for all lib dems ;-) it might work.
If there is any indication that ECJ decisions are binding, she will get in serious trouble as this is clearly not compatible with her promise on sovereignty - in this case 10 years would be seen as way too long.
What will be interesting is, if the former is the agreement, how the European Parliament will cope.
IF ECJ judgements are not binding, then the EU and the EU Parliament backed down. I personally think that we should have refused any involvement, but it would be wrong to claim this as a win for the EU.
On money, the EU wanted a lump sum settlement and the reports are that they have not received this. IF there is a clear expression that the money is tied to a trade deal, the UK have not won nothing. Again, I would have paid nothing.
On NI, if the agreement is on regulatory equivalence the UK has conceded nothing of value - this is a requirement for CETA. Regulatory alignment is completely different and would indeed by a abject surrender.
Overall I prefer no deal because I don't think the EU can offer us anything useful in trade talks and that by going down this path we will run out of time and get stuck with a terrible outcome. But it is not NECESSARILY true that the UK have achieved nothing in Stage 1 - it is very dependent on the detailed text.
It's other things he doesn't like.
Tough negotiators in the EU and unlike our clowns they have done their homework. Any trade deal will be by supremely informed and disciplined EU vs shambolic lazy mendacious UK negotiators. Its like the secondary school third XI vs Manchester United.
How many porn addicts only look at porn on their office computer?
https://twitter.com/ecrgroup/status/938793336541937664?s=17
https://twitter.com/bbcthisweek/status/938919509674549250?s=17
And did the EU really want time-limited jurisdiction (or whatever you want to call it)? I suspect they were after more than that.
Not the most favoured product in certain Bedford household but I was unaware of its runaway success in Ulster.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMTAUr3Nm6I
On the other hand, those who know what they're talking about, say:
One strand of comment that has been common amongst those who oppose Britain’s withdrawal from the EU is that when the alleged difficulties and consequences of Brexit become clear to voters they will come to regret the decision to Leave – or at least will wish to sue for a soft Brexit. The experience of the last six months suggests this logic may be faulty......
Rather than coming to the conclusion that the progress of the Brexit process so far means they came to the wrong decision about the EU, it seems that Leave voters are inclined to the view that those responsible for the process – including the EU as well as the UK government – are (from their perspective) failing to make progress towards the kind of future arrangement that they would largely still like to see. In short, they blame the actors in the Brexit process not the act of leaving itself. If the talks about Brexit continue to be difficult and if the economy does indeed begin to suffer, we should not presume that voters in Britain will change their minds about the merits of Brexit. Rather they may simply blame politicians - on both sides of the channel – for their apparent failure to deliver what those who voted for Leave have all along said they want.
https://whatukthinks.org/eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/EU-Briefing-Paper-11-Half-time-brexit-negotiations.pdf
Boris may have made a responded to Peter Bone's suggestion that the EU should "go whistle" (I forget the exact quote, but he said something like 'if some of the numbers that are being quoted in the press are right, then I think they could be deemed exorbitant and, if so, then the honourable member's terminology might be appropriate') but that was never the negotiating position. It was always "we will meet our liabilities in full and are willing to make a contribution in return for a trade deal"
We may have achieved this (depends on the detail)
ECJ - this is the biggest issue, but the red line is removing the ECJ's overarching role over all UK law. This has been achieved. I don't like any ECJ involvement (I generally have a thing about extraterritoriality) but if it is - as reported - by reference only and for a time limited period then I can live with it.
On the Irish border - equivalence would be a fantastic win for the UK. Regulatory alignment in certain sectors based on decisions by Stormont is fine. A commitment to "no divergence" is not acceptable.
If you actually looked at the detail rather than relying on headlines you'd see that both sides have compromised - as you'd expect in any tough negotiation.
https://www.tesla.com/roadster/
1/4 mile 8.8 sec
Top Speed Over 250 mph
Wheel Torque 10,000 Nm
Range 620 miles
https://twitter.com/JamesCrisp6/status/939011538504974337
https://twitter.com/MartinSelmayr/status/939013357633355776
One of the lasting images of election night this year was George Osborne in the ITV studios. As the exit poll was announced, his face first turned to shock and then to undisguised pleasure as he pronounced Theresa May a “dead woman walking”. The longer the night went on, the more jubilant he became. By the time the last few results came in, the former chancellor and now editor of the Evening Standard – among half a dozen other well-paid jobs – was all but standing on the table in the studio shouting “loser, loser” at the prime minister’s tear-stained face on the TV monitor.
The smile has barely left his face since. George is a man hell-bent on squeezing every bit of enjoyment out of his revenge. Scarcely a day goes by in the pages of his newspaper without him putting the boot into the woman who sacked him.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/07/gentle-george-struggles-to-keep-his-killer-instincts-in-check?CMP=twt_gu