Conservative party

The FT’s Alex Barker has made an important discovery in the OBR’s report. The coalition’s immigration cap will make no impact on net migration. ‘The interim OBR’s June Budget estimates of trend growth estimates were based on an average net inward migration assumption of 140,000 per annum…. Since June, the Government has announced a limit of 21,700 for non-EU migrants coming into the UK under the skilled and highly skilled routes from April 2011, a reduction of 6,300 on 2009. At this stage, we judge that there is insufficient reason to change our average net migration assumption of 140,000 per year from 2010, which remains well below the net inflows of 198,000 seen in 2009.

The NOtoAV campaign has unveiled its patrons. It’s an impressive list. Margaret Beckett is the President, supported by Blunkett, Falconer, Prescott, Reid and Emily Thornberry on one side and Ken Clarke, Micheal Gove, William Hague, Steve Norris and Baroness Warsi on the other. The squeeze is on. The YEStoAV campaign has Labour supporters, but they aren’t quite so august. Iain Martin reckons that the YES team are faced with a cross-party opposition that can get these diverse big beasts working together. Iain calls it a pincer movement on the Lib Dems. The strategy is to characterise electoral reform as aan exclusively sectional interest: Clegg’s fixation.

As you’d expect, Michael Gove’s White Paper is a feast of good sense. His speech in the Commons was powerful analysis, and his rebuttal of Labour MPs fun to watch. He’s all for making kids learn properly in primary school, retaining order in the classroom, making detention easier and better modern language teaching. Amen, amen, amen. But, I fear that the White Paper will not be transformative, for a simple reason: the schools system is broken. It doesn’t respond to instructions. The Education Secretary does not run education - power rests with local authorities and the teaching unions. They’re not too keen on Gove, and have allies in parliament ready to insert the odd amendment into legislation. Top-down instructions won’t work.

David Cameron is playing down the effect the Royal Wedding will have on the 5th May elections, especially the AV referendum. Fleet Street’s having none of it however. On the one hand, Benedict Brogan can already hear the pops of champagne corks in the No to AV campaign offices. He reasons: ‘One consequence of the Royal wedding will be to make it even more difficult for AV supporters to get their campaign motoring in time for the referendum.’ On the other, Alex Barker makes the case for the Lib Dems’ Yes to AV campaign. He has a three point-plan, centring on low turnout following reduced campaign time. This, he thinks, will benefit those concerned about the injustice of the current system, rather than its die-hard defenders.

Ed Miliband has come roaring back from his paternity leave, keen to silence the growing chorus of criticism that he is not in control of his party and has let the Coalition determine the agenda.     To do so, he has come out in favour of a permanent top rate of income tax at 50 percent, but is otherwise taking a leaf out of the Cameron playbook - by establishing a number of policy reviews. But he might want to take another look at Cameron's experience. Reviews are a great tactical ploy - they show a willingness to "think big", allow a leader to reach out to a range party factions, aid front bench spokesmen to understand their portfolios and, perhaps most importantly, punts any serious policy discussions into the future.

Len McCluskey has won the race to lead Unite, Britain’s largest union. McCluskey will therefore have a major role in how the left respond to cuts in public spending. It would premature to label McCluskey but he comes with a reputation for militancy. He cut his teeth at the Transport and General Workers Union in the 80s and was a confidant of Derek Hatton’s. And he hasn’t forsaken childish things – being an integral figure in the long running and wholely counter-productive BA dispute. So, impeccable credentials for a man of the old left; akin to the roll call of Wellington, Sandhurst and the City for those on the right. But McCluskey must resist temptation.

After being pre-empted by the morning newspapers, Ken Clarke's statement this afternoon contained nothing that was unexpected. "We've paid the money so we can move on," he said. And he went on to emphasise that the Guantanamo payouts are not an admission of culpability, but rather all about sparing the public's money and the spooks' time. More striking were some of the responses from Clarke's coalition stablemates. Take Tom Brake, the Lib Dem MP for Carshalton and Wallington, who suggested that the government wouldn't have made the payments if the UK didn't have a case to answer.

A minor landmark for David Cameron tonight, as he delivers his first Mansion House speech as Prime Minister. Like occupants of No.10 before him, he will use the occasion to talk about foreign affairs – although the result may be rather more like the Chancellor's annual speech at the same venue. Judging by the extracts that have been released so far, Cameron's overall emphasis will be on the economy, and on Britain's fiscal standing. As he will say, "we need to sort out the economy if we are to carry weight in the world." Cameron develops this point by claiming that, "whenever I meet foreign leaders, they do not see a Britain shuffling apologetically off the world stage.