Isabel Hardman

You can tell a lot about how a party’s press operation thinks things are going from who it sends out to do its dirty work on the airwaves. Yesterday the Conservatives sent Michael Fallon out to defend the Government’s £9m pro-EU leaflet, which suggested that they knew it was going to be controversial and would need defending by someone skilled at sticking to the line, even when the line is totally untenable and difficult to defend. Today, Nick Boles popped up on Radio 4 to defend David Cameron’s eventual admission that he had indeed made money from the offshore fund set up by his father.

David Cameron has defended the £9m government leaflet promoting the EU as ‘money well spent’ and ‘necessary’, as the Tory party erupts into fury once again. What’s interesting about this new row - over a leaflet sent to all homes which sets out ‘why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK’ - is that it has incensed not just those usual suspects who are annoyed that the Remain side already has a natural advantage in the referendum campaign in that it can wheel out the Prime Minister for guaranteed media attention whenever it likes.

Downing Street has spent the past 24 hours trying to clarify David Cameron’s links to an offshore fund set up by his late father, which never paid tax in Britain. Initially, Downing Street said this was a ‘private matter’, Cameron was then asked about the matter, and said ‘I own no shares, no offshore trusts, no offshore funds, nothing like that. And, so that, I think, is a very clear description.’ Then Downing Street issued a statement saying ‘to be clear, the Prime Minister, his wife and their children do not benefit from any offshore funds’. And today Number 10 had to clarify further: ‘There are no offshore funds/trusts which the prime minister, Mrs Cameron or their children will benefit from in future.

Jeremy Corbyn has launched Labour’s local election campaign today with the promise that his party will stand up to the government, and the claim that it is being effective in doing so. He said: ‘Now, being in Opposition is never easy, I think we all know that. But Labour in Westminster has proved you can still have influence and you can still make a difference. it was by speaking out and standing up with people with disabilities that we shamed the government into abandoning their disgraceful cuts to personal independence payments. ‘But we’re not done yet. We will continue the campaign to stop the cuts to disabled people’s ESA that is still there as a proposal in the Budget.

Why have Jeremy Corbyn’s allies drawn up a list ranking Labour MPs according to how hostile they are to the leadership? It’s not the first list that categorises MPs: I revealed in the Times recently that the moderates who are plotting to destabilise the Labour leader had drawn up their own list that ranged from the ‘signed-up Corbynistas’, the ‘nervous soft left’, the ‘organisational left’, ‘centrists’ and the moderates. It might be that the Corbynites are simply trying to understand the Labour party a bit better and finally improve their parliamentary operation.

Are there going to be more welfare cuts or not? In an afternoon in which the government tried to calm the row following the resignation of Iain Duncan Smith, the key line that stood out was Stephen Crabb telling the Commons that ‘we have no further plans to make welfare savings beyond the very substantial savings legislated for by parliament two weeks ago’. The new Work and Pensions Secretary’s language was qualified by the Treasury, which clarified that this didn’t mean no more cuts in this parliament - just that the government didn’t have any planned. But it has become the big takeaway story from yesterday’s medley of statements. George Osborne plans to defend his Budget today as part of the wind-up session in the Commons.

The government is in a mess, with the Chancellor having to go underground while a row rages in the Conservative party about whether or not the central mission of the Prime Minister to lead a compassionate Conservative party is really happening in practice. David Cameron had to use his statement on the European Council this afternoon to defend the government's record on social justice, and praise the work of Iain Duncan Smith in an attempt to get things back on track. And yet Jeremy Corbyn saw today's open goal yawning before him, and decided to kick the ball into a hedge. The Labour leader managed to mention the fact he'd only been given advance sight of half of Cameron's statement twice, but omitted to raise Iain Duncan Smith once.

I've just recorded a podcast with Fraser Nelson about why Iain Duncan Smith resigned as Work & Pensions Secretary earlier this evening.

How does George Osborne get away with it? The Chancellor was asked this on the Today programme this morning, with John Humphrys needling him on the economic targets on debt and deficit that he set himself and asking whether if he could miss two out of three of those targets and potentially be on course to miss a third, ‘what’s a bloke got to do in your job to get the sack?’ Osborne repeatedly argued that there was more to do, saying ‘by our own measurements and the tests we have set ourselves.. we have got more to do’. The picture he painted was of the government making progress towards meeting its targets.

[audioplayer src="http://rss.acast.com/spectatorpolitics/georgeosbornesbudget-2016/media.mp3" title="Fraser Nelson, Isabel Hardman and James Forsyth discuss today's Budget"] Listen [/audioplayer]There were two striking things about George Osborne’s Budget today. The first was that having made sure that the weekend papers carried reports of all the pain that he was going to have to inflict on the nation to help it weather the economic storm that is coming, the Chancellor then barely mentioned what that pain would entail. He built up the start of his speech by lecturing the Commons on the necessity of the pain, warning that ‘we have a choice: we can choose to add to the risk and uncertainty, or we can be a force for stability’.