Cameron v Corbyn – Verdict: “I am not particularly good at or interested in this theatrical-riposte stuff,” Jeremy Corbyn told the New Yorker recently for a long and insightful profile that is well worth reading. Parliamentary debates almost always have a theatrical element, and that is particularly true of the Queen’s speech debate, where the opening contributions are expected to have the qualities of a classic best man’s speech – a kernel of supercharged sincerity, bundled up in a package of first-class jokes. Corbyn is right to acknowledge that this is not his natural environment, but actually the beginning of his speech was very good indeed. He started with a reference to this being the centenary of the Battle of the Somme, and of the Sykes-Picot agreement, and he made a profound point about how the colonial carve-up of the Middle East illustrates how decisions taken by politicians have consequences that can last for years. It sounded as if he is already starting to prepare his speech for the Iraq report debate. His tributes to Caroline Spelman and Phillip Lee were also very funny. And then he made some strong points about the Queen’s speech, in particular when he accused the government of viewing poverty simply as a matter of personal behaviour.

But then it deteriorated quite badly. To a large extent it was just a matter of Corbyn going on too long. An MP can hold the attention of the House, even when a majority of those in the chamber are hostile, provided he or she is interesting or engaging, but Corbyn lost his audience, and his refusal to take interventions did not help. Also, he did not have one core message that stuck. Cameron’s claim to lead a progressive, one nation government may be on that does not survive scrutiny, but Cameron hammered it out at the start of his speech, at the end, and several times in between. That is how successful communication works.

Otherwise Cameron’s speech was standard fare from someone who may be losing his party, but who does have total command of the House. His Corbyn-bashing passage included some half-funny jokes, but there were probably too many of them, and it came over as gratuitous and borderline nasty. To his credit, though, he did include at least one joke against himself. He said that his next pro-EU speech would include a warning about a plague a locusts, in an admission that Boris Johnson was not entirely wrong to mock him for threatening bubonic plague in the event of Brexit.

I will post quotes from the speeches shortly.

David Cameron says Corbyn spoke for 41 minutes without taking an intervention.

He says he has never seen that before.

Was there no Labour MP or SNP MP with a question. He says he knows the SNP have other things on their mind …

Hi, we’re experiencing a few technical problems in Westminster so I’m just going to pick up coverage of Corbyn’s response to the Queen’s speech temporarily.

After some traditional joviality, Corbyn is now attacking chunks of the Government’s forthcoming legislative agenda.

Corbyn says prime minister is failing to deliver key pledges on the so-called Northern Powerhouse, building homes and developing a digital infrastructure.

It takes commitment to fund them.

Alan Travis, our home affairs editor, and Owen Bowcott, our legal affairs correspondent, have been taking a closer look at the revised plans for a UK bill of rights. Here’s what they make of it:

There has been a significant shift in the wording on Downing Street lobby notes on the promise to introduce a British bill of rights. Hours are spent on the wording of these documents so a change can be crucial. In the 2015 Queen’s Speech promised to introduce a British Bill of Rights to replace the Human Rights Act.

This has now changed. Instead a British Bill of Rights is still promised but its purpose will be “to reform and modernise the UK human rights framework”. All talk of replacing or scrapping the Human Rights Act has been dropped. For the first time there is also an explicit commitment that “these rights will be based on those set out in the European Convention on Human Rights, while also taking into account our common law tradition.”

The absence of further detail was no surprise. Launch of the draft consultation has, it is assumed, been postponed until after the referendum campaign. Having the Justice Secretary, Michael Gove, a committed Brexiteer, present arcane arguments about weakening the UK’s relationship with European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg in the middle of a campaign over the role of the European Union in Brussels is deemed too politically complicated.

The delay also avoids provoking fresh rows within the cabinet about how to redefine the relationship between the UK courts and European judges. There was no mention of the mooted Sovereignty Bill, an initiative supposedly developed to curb the powers of the European Union Court of Justice in Luxembourg and originally designed to keep Boris Johnson within the remain camp.

The Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, believes the change in wording on a British Bill of Rights is significant. He said:

I hope that this is the start of a climb-down from the government on their previous plans to scrap the Human Rights Act. Liberal Democrats blocked Tory attempts to scrap the Act in Government and are leading the fight to save the Human Rights Act. I am clear this is one of the most important pieces of legislation to protect the interests of British citizens. Liberal Democrats will work with people in all parties to make sure that these rights are not undermined or diluted.

Phillip Lee is speaking now.

He says it is not the first time he has followed Spelman. She leads the parliamentary skiing team.

He says he is not the son of a bus driver. But his father did once drive a milk float, he says.

You wait for years for the son of a bus driver to come along. Then two come along at once, he says. (That is one of Khan’s jokes, about him and Sajid Javid.)

He says he is a doctor. Speaking about the importance of PR, he says it is important to realise that, for a doctor, PR refers to something else: a medical examination carried out with rubber gloves on, involving gel and asking the man to cough.

He advises Cameron, if he is speaking to an audience of doctors, not to tell them that he used to do PR and enjoyed it.

Caroline Spelman, the environment secretary, is proposing the loyal address to the Queen.

The Queen’s speech debate always starts with speeches from two government backbenchers, a veteran and a relative newcomer, who propose and second the loyal address.

They are expected to be funny.

The Queen’s speech debate is about to start.

As is customary, John Bercow, the Speaker, starts by reading a statement about the obligations of MPs.

• David Cameron is seeking to look beyond divisions in the Conservative party over Europe by promising to “increase life chances” through a programme of social reform in the Queen’s speech, including changes to prisons, schools and adoption. As Heather Stewart reports, the government’s annual legislative programme includes 20 bills, on topics ranging from streamlining housebuilding to tackling extremism – as well as three carried over from the previous session, including the investigatory powers bill, which will make it easier for public bodies to monitor communications. But the agenda was immediately criticised by former cabinet minister Iain Duncan Smith for deliberately avoiding controversy.

• Cabinet minister Chris Grayling, a leading figure in the campaign to leave the EU, has repeatedly refused to back fellow Brexiter Boris Johnson over his comments likening Adolf Hitler’s conquests to greater European integration.

• Johnson has accused Lord Heseltine of “synthetic outrage” after Heseltine said yesterday that Johnson’s reference to the EU being like Nazi Germany was “obscene”. See (11am.)

• An opinion poll has shown Remain with an 18-point lead over Leave. (See 12.33pm.)

• Britain’s employment rate reached a record high and wages ticked up in March, dashing government claims that the job market was being seriously damaged by the threat of a leave vote in the EU referendum.

• Labour’s Carwyn Jones has been reappointed as first minister in Wales.

• Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, has carried out a reshuffle. John Swinney, finance secretary for the last nine years, becomes education secretary. Former transport secretary Derek Mackay becomes finance secretary, and Keith Brown becomes economy secretary.

Children’s charities said the focus on “life chances” was meaningless without a concerted parallel attempt to tackle child poverty, which is expected to soar in the next four years as cuts to benefits hit home.

They voiced concern that the new life chances strategy would place much less emphasis on low family income as a measure of deprivation – looking instead at less easily defined factors including family background, addiction and debt.

The speech annouced that: “To tackle poverty and the causes of deprivation, including family instability, addiction and debt, my Government will introduce new indicators for measuring life chances.”

Matthew Reed, Chief Executive of The Children’s Society, said: “The Government’s welcome interest in improving life chances will mean little without a concerted effort to tackle child poverty, which is projected to rise significantly in the coming years.

“Reducing the number of families struggling with debt and surviving on low incomes must be at the centre of any new strategy.”

A more powerful strategy to improve life chances of the most disadvantaged children would involve the scrapping of the four-year freeze on children’s benefits, and cuts to support for working families in Universal Credit, he said.

Chief Executive of 4Children, Imelda Redmond CBE, added: “It is vital that the impact of low income is not forgotten. While the commitment to a higher wage, lower welfare economy is the right goal – the facts remain that of the 2.3 million children living in poverty, almost two thirds are in working households.”

While the u-turn on turning all schools in to academies by 2020 has dominated the attention of most in education circles, the Queen’s speech also confirmed plans for a higher education bill that would support the establishment of new universities. Sally Weale writes:

The bill comes hot on the heels of the government’s higher education white paper which was published on Monday. The government briefing notes published alongside the Queen’s speech says it will be “the biggest supply-side reforms to the higher education sector for a quarter of a century”.

The new legislation will open up the sector to new providers and make it easier for them to award degrees and achieve university status, allowing them to compete with existing universities. The government wants to boost competition within the sector, but critics have warned it could put at risk the reputation of UK universities.

Jonathan Clifton, associate director for public services at Institute for Public Policy Research, warned that the US higher education system showed how allowing profit-making companies to establish universities could “end in tears”.

“This policy will only be successful if it enables genuinely innovative types of higher education institution to be established – rather than helping private companies to make a quick buck,” he said.

Cameron’s broader goal – of widening access to universities for young people – has been a long-standing aim for the prime minister. Back in January he accused his old university, Oxford, of “not doing enough to attract talent from across our country” and noted that Oxford accepted just 27 black students in a single year. He promised then to create new legislation to shame elite universities into improving diversity – and here it is.

Under the new bill, all universities will have to publish detailed information about application, offer and progression rates, broken down by ethnicity, gender and socio-economic background to “shine a spotlight” on how well universities are performing in terms of social mobility. There has been widespread support for this – and for the stronger focus on teaching quality in the new bill – but there’s still concern about other measures which many in the sector fear will impact on potential students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

You can read the Queen’s speech, and all the accompanying backgrounds notes issued by the government, here.

The key document is this one (pdf), the 86-page background briefing paper.

And here is an extract from David Cameron’s introduction to the Queen’s speech briefing pack. In it, Cameron repeatedly stresses his belief that he is running a one nation government.

In the past six years, whether in education or welfare, this government has consistently demonstrated that we will take on difficult arguments, make difficult choices and undertake big and bold reforms to spread opportunity. This Queen’s speech is no different. At its heart are major changes to adoption and social work, so children in care are not doomed to a life of poverty. There are reforms to schools, so excellence that comes with more teacher freedom is spread to every community. There is an expansion of higher education, so just as we uncapped the number of student places we now encourage the new universities that will help educate the next generation. And because this Government sees the potential in everyone, we will finally undertake the long-overdue change that our prisons need. No longer will they be warehouses for criminals; we want them to be incubators of changed and reformed lives.

We also know that we cannot deliver opportunity for all and extend life chances, unless we also tackle the menace of extremism. We should be proud of the fact that today Britain is already one of the most successful multi-racial, multi-faith democracies anywhere on earth. But we must also recognise that extremists – both violent and non-violent – are trying to drive our country apart. So this Queen’s speech stands up for our liberal values by taking on the extremists with new powers to disrupt their activities, while protecting young people in unregulated schools from those who preach a message of intolerance and separatism …

This is a Queen’s speech that uses the strong foundations of our economy to make a series of bold choices that will improve lives across the country. It is a one nation Queen’s speech from a progressive, one nation, Conservative government.

The counter-extremism bill, which was once cast in the leading role in David Cameron’s “legacy” legislative programme, is still far from ready to be introduced to Parliament.

If anything the Tory’s manifesto plans have actually gone backwards. At the time of the Conservative party conference in October 2015, the prime minister and home secretary unveiled what appeared to be firm plans to tackle the jihadist and extremist threat in Britain. Detailed measures were outlined to ban extremist groups, to issue orders disrupting individual extremists and powers to close down premises used to support extremism.

But now that is all back in the melting pot. Instead, the bill outlined in the Queen’s speech promises to “introduce a new civil order regime to restrict extremist activity, following consultation.”

Whitehall sources confirm that the crackdown has been delayed because government lawyers have struggled for more than eight months to find a “legally robust” definition of extremism, which would withstand the first legal challenge on freedom of speech grounds from those it seeks to ban.

Theresa May, who once wanted Ofcom to have the power to censor British programmes containing extremist material before they were broadcast, has also been forced to accept a further watered down power. A once trumpeted campaign for British values is also waiting on a report from Louise Casey on integration.

The bill will now simply proposes that Ofcom should “close loopholes” to protect consumers who watch internet-streamed television content from outside the EU on Freeview.

What remains is a drive to intervene in unregulated part-time schools or madrasas where “extremist adults” are active and using the Disclosure and Barring Service to prevent the “entryism” by extremists working in the public sector or with children.

And here is a summary of the children and social work bill from the Press Association.

A shake-up of adoption rules has been unveiled to try and move more children more quickly from the care system into family life.

The children and social work bill, unveiled in the Queen’s speech, is aimed at reducing delays in placing children with new adoptive parents.

The new law is also intended to improve social care standards across England.

Ministers insist the bill will “tip the balance in favour of permanent adoption where that is the right thing for the child. And drive improvements in the social work profession by introducing more demanding professional standards, and setting-up a specialist regulator for the profession.”

The legislation is intended to give people leaving the care system more help via a new covenant to ensure local authorities act as a better “corporate parent” to help them when they make the transition into adulthood and independent living.

Care leavers will get the right to a personal adviser up to the age of 25 to help them move into adulthood as part of the overhaul.

Court and local councils will have to “take better account” of a child’s need for stability when making adoption decisions as part of the changes.

A specialist regulator for social work will also be established to improve standards and training.

The government says reform is needed because one in four people in prison have been in care.

The Queen’s speech included pledges to ensure faster adoption for children in care, improving the standard of social work and creating better opportunities for children raised in the system. On the detail of the children and social work bill, Patrick Butler writes:

It’s not the first time the prime minister has promised to speed up the adoption process. Cameron’s been saying he would “tear down the barriers” since at least 2012, with mixed results. The Queen’s speech is an attempt to re-launch an adoption policy that after early success, has badly stalled.

Putting prime ministerial weight behind adoption – Cameron declared that there was “no more pressing issue” for government – initially produced spectacular results. Adoption rates rose to record levels of 5,000 a year. But by late 2014, the gains started to go into reverse. A landmark family judgement by the then president of the family division, Sir James Munby, was clear that ministerial wishes to speed up the process should not override the law – which stated that adoption should be a last resort, and that approval for taking a child from a parent required the highest level of evidence, properly considered.

Munby identified a “recurring inadequacy” in too many adoption applications made by local authorities. He also argued the new 26 week target ignored the fact that “the issues are too grave, the stakes for all are too high, for the outcome to be determined by rigorous adherence to an inflexible timetable.”

His ruling triggered a fall off in local authority adoption applications, and adoption placement orders granted by the courts. Pro-adoption commentators have argued that local authorities have overacted to the ruling. But that has not stemmed the retreat.

Critics point out that the focus on adoption should not obscure the bigger picture: that austerity and rising poverty, coupled with massive cuts to family intervention services, have accelerated the numbers of children being taken into care. Fixing flaws in the adoption process is fine; but investing to prevent youngsters coming into care and adoption proceedings in the first place, should be the priority.

Here is a summary of the criminal finances bill from the Press Association.

New powers to clamp down on tax evasion and money laundering have been unveiled in the Queen’s speech.

The criminal finances bill will make it an offence for companies to fail to stop staff facilitating tax evasion.

The measures are also aimed at making it easier for the courts to recover criminal assets.

The system of Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) is to be improved to better use public and private resources, ministers said.

More than 350,000 SARs were filed with the UK Finance Unit and National Crime Agency last year, with the government recovering £224m from money laundering and terrorist financing in 2015-16.

This is from the Press Association on the neighbourhood planning and infrastructure bill.

The process for the compulsory purchase of homes and land to make way for new developments will be made faster under sweeping changes to planning laws aimed at addressing the housing crisis and building vital infrastructure.

The changes set out in the Queen’s speech will “further empower local communities” and make the planning process “clearer, faster and fairer”, officials said.

The legislation will pave the way for the Land Registry to be sold off and put the National Infrastructure Commission on a statutory basis.

Other measures contained in the Queen’s speech will give councils in England the power to retain business rates – and potentially cut them – while elected mayors will be given London-style powers to franchise local bus services.

The planning moves will ensure that pre-commencement conditions are only imposed by councils where they are “absolutely necessary” to prevent them slowing down or stopping the construction of new homes once planning permission has been granted.

The reforms to compulsory purchase are aimed at speeding up the process, which can result in drawn-out legal rows as people try to hang on to their homes or challenge the compensation offered to them to make way for major schemes.

The explanatory document setting out the measures announced by the Queen indicates they will reform the way compensation is decided, basing values on the market rate without the proposed development.

The neighbourhood planning and infrastructure bill will “make the compulsory purchase order process clearer, fairer and faster for all those involved” in England and Wales, officials said.

Labour says the Queen’s speech shows that the government is “running out of steam”. This is from Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow minister without portfolio.

It’s clear from today’s Queen’s speech that this is a failing Tory government running out of steam. The flagship measure on prisons reform may seem familiar because it is.

The Tories have been promising a rehabilitation revolution for nearly a decade but the reality is on their watch prisons have become dangerously overcrowded and understaffed, with rising levels of violence and drug abuse.

The idea that David Cameron can seek to portray his programme for government as ‘one nation’ is nothing short of ludicrous. This is a Tory government that has cut taxes for millionaires while making everyone else pay more.

And what we’ve seen from the various U-turns and backtracking in recent weeks, this is a government that is weak, divided and unable to get its business through parliament.

With its glimmer of a future that contains roads filled with driverless cars, widespread drone use and a commercial spaceport in the UK, the Modern transport bill was perhaps the most eye-catching announcement in the Queen’s speech. On its significance, though, Gwyn Topham writes:

The Modern Transport Bill should allow Britain to continue to invest and exploit its unusual advantages as a testbed for driverless cars – partly as a country that failed to ratify an international convention that explicitly demands a driver in the front seat.

But grey areas remain, and promised moves such as allowing driverless cars to be insured under normal policies will give more clarity as the likes of Volvo roll out further trials on public roads. Manufacturers of autonomous vehicles believe the biggest delays to their introduction won’t be in technology, but in creating public acceptance and amending the rules of the road, which this bill should address.

Pilots have welcomed news of regulation on drones but may be jumping the gun: the government appears again stressing to be the opportunity for UK industry to ride the boom in manufacture and operation, rather than rein in their use. ATOL protection for holidays booked online will also be updated, in line with recent EU agreement.

The Buses Bill could extend franchising powers already promised to directly elected mayors to other local authorities on a case by case basis – potentially a triumph for regions which have tried to wrest back control from bitterly opposed transport firms such as Stagecoach – and demand operators release data on routes and fares for apps, improving the lot of passengers. But campaigners will want to see assurances about funding, with bus services outside urban areas badly hit since government grants were cut.

Ipsos MORI has released a poll today showing Remain 18 points ahead of Leave. As the Evening Standard reports, Remain is pulling ahead because of a shift from Tory voters.

Today’s survey reveals the Remain campaign has pulled ahead to its biggest lead in the past three months — with 55 per cent for staying in and 37 per cent for leaving the EU.

This is mainly due to a marked shift among Conservative supporters. The Tory swing suggests the Prime Minister’s intense campaigning is having a significant impact on his party’s followers.

This appears to confirm a trend shown in the Telegraph’s ORB poll yesterday.

The publication of the poll seems to have an impact on the value of the pound, which shot up as soon as the news come out. This is from Bloomberg’s Robert Hutton.

The Queen didn’t actually say “academies” – perhaps not surprising after the government’s embarrassing U-turn on a commitment to force all schools to become academies by 2022. But in the detailed summary of the speech, it says there will be new legislation to “expand” the academies programme in the poorest performing local authority areas.

Its a significant climbdown for education secretary Nicky Morgan, though she has since insisted the original aim still stands, without the hard deadline. The government will focus on converting schools within under-performing councils – a definition of which will be subject to a consultation and a vote by MPs.

Meanwhile, many will welcome legislation to reform the national funding formula by which many schools, particularly those in rural areas, currently feel they lose out to urban schools which receive substantially greater funds. London schools however have a lot to lose in the reorganisation.

Some early reaction from Allan Foulds, president of the Association of School and College Leaders, suggests schools feel that for all the talk about academies, the immediately challenges facing them are still budget constraints and a shortage of teachers.

Foulds also expressed disappointment that there was no mention of the teaching recruitment crisis. “The government has not so far announced measures which go far enough or fast enough in addressing the teacher recruitment crisis, she said. “It must do more to promote and incentivise teaching as a great career.”

“Measures will be brought forward to create the right for every household to access high speed broadband,” the Queen said, trailing the government’s Digital economy bill. A good step forward and a big vote winner, Miles Brignall writes:

Compensation for a lost broadband connection would be hugely welcomed by households up and down the country – particularly anyone who’s been through it recently. A guaranteed minimum speed of 10Mbs would also see a big upgrade for millions of households in rural areas.

Over the last decade, UK households have become so reliant on broadband, that many would opt lose their water supply before their internet connection. Currently it can takes days and even months to get BT Openreach, Virgin, or the other telecoms companies to fix a problem – a nightmare for those who work at home or run a small business.

Currently, only the water and gas and electricity companies are required to compensate customers if the supply fails, and it is the company’s fault.

But how much would you get? Electricity firms currently pay £75 if the power was out for longer than 12 hours, and £35 for each following 12 hours – assuming that fewer than 5,000 homes were affected. Similar such penalties would likely force the much criticised Openreach, and others, to get their act together and get people back on line within the day. Could be a big vote winner – particularly among those with teenage kids.

On the pensions bill, which was promised in the Queen’s speech to bolster protections for those saving for retirement, Hilary Osborne writes:

The government had been under pressure to include a pensions bill addressing the issue of “master trusts” – schemes which are being used by many employers for auto-enrolment of workers. At the weekend, the work and pensions select committee warned that the lack of regulation around the schemes could result in savers losing money and trust in the system being damaged.

The bill will also address high exit charges faced by some retirees when they try to cash in their pensions under freedoms introduced in 2015 – that is good news for savers who want to move their money around.

However, some will be disappointed. There is nothing in it for the women who have seen their state pension age rise and have been campaigning for the government to offset this in some way. And the former pensions minister, Steve Webb, now director of Policy at pensions firm Royal London said the bill was “disappointing”. He said “urgent action” was needed to get employees saving more than the statutory minimum of 8% of their pay.

Here is the Press Association on the NHS (overseas visitors charging) bill.

Overseas visitors and migrants face a tough clampdown on accessing NHS care, with more powers for hospitals to recover costs.

The new NHS (overseas visitors charging) bill, which is to be published before the Parliamentary summer recess, will tighten up the rules around eligibility for free NHS care.

It means fewer European visitors will qualify for NHS care, while more overseas visitors and migrants would be charged for NHS services the government says they are not entitled to.

An independent report for the Department of Health in 2013 suggested overseas visitors and migrants cost the NHS about 2 billion a year.

Under the new bill, only UK residents who “live here lawfully and make a financial contribution to this country” will get free NHS care, according to details in the Queen’s speech.

The new legislation will extend the current range of services for which the NHS is able to charge and there will also be more powers for hospitals to recover the full costs from overseas patients.

At present, emergency care, GP visits and family planning are exempt from charges. People suffering life-threatening illnesses and some other diseases are also exempt.

The government has already introduced an immigration health surcharge (IHS) for non-European Economic Area nationals who apply for a visa to stay in the UK for six months or longer.

This is from the Press Association on the counter-extremism and safeguarding bill.

New measures to protect children and restrict the activities of fanatics will be rolled out in a crackdown on extremism.

The counter-extremism and safeguarding bill will include powers to intervene in unregulated schools which “teach hate” and “drive communities apart”

Vetting rules are expected to be adapted to enable employers to check whether an individual is an extremist and bar them from working with children.

Ministers will consult on rolling out a civil order regime to “restrict extremist activity”, as well as new powers to enable the government to step in when councils fail to tackle extremism.

The legislation aims to help deliver on the Tories’ manifesto pledge to tackle all forms of extremism, so “our values and our way of life are properly promoted and defended”.

The bill follows a programme to tackle extremism and radicalisation announced last year.

It proposed introducing banning orders for extremist organisations who use hate speech in public places, but whose activities fall short of proscription, and new powers for authorities to close down premises used to support extremism.

Here is my colleague Rowena Mason’s guide to the key points in the Queen’s speech.

The Queen says:

My government will use the opportunity of a strengthening economy to deliver security for working people, to increase life chances for the most disadvantaged and to strengthen national defences.

My ministers will continue to bring the public finances under control so that Britain lives within its means, and to move to a higher wage and lower welfare economy where work is rewarded.

Analysis: The opening of the Queen’s speech always amounts to a mini government “mission statement”. During the general election David Cameron made “security” (economic and national) his key selling point, but after his election victory he pledged to rule as a “one nation Conservative” and the focus on “life chances” shows he has not abandoned this ambition.

Boris Johnson has responded to Lord Heseltine’s attack on his EU rhetoric yesterday. Speaking to reporters outside his home, Johnson accused Heseltine of “synthetic outrage”.

The most important thing is that everybody should cut out the synthetic outrage about things I haven’t said and stick to the facts.

The facts are that the EU is now producing about 60% of the law made in this country, it’s changed out of all recognition from what we signed up to in 1972, it is making it impossible for us to control our borders and it costs about £350m per week.

The only safe option is to vote Leave on June 23.

For the umpteenth time, it is worth pointing out that the UK Statistics Authority had described that £350m per week figure as “potentially misleading”.

Here are the headline unemployment figures.

• Unemployment fell by 2,000 to 1.69m between January and March.

• The claimant count fell by 2,400 to 737,800.

• Average earnings increased by 2% in the year to March, 0.1% up on the previous
  month.

The full details are in the Office for National Statistics bulletin here.