Jonathan Jones

As Isabel reported earlier, today's public finance statistics contained a double dose of bad news for George Osborne. Not only did borrowing in May come in higher than expected at £17.9 billion — £2.7 billion higher than May last year — but the borrowing figures for the last two years were revised up as well. Before today, we thought the government had borrowed £136.8 billion in 2010/11 and £124.4 billion in 2011/12. Today, we learn it was in fact £140.6 billion and £127.6 billion respectively. That means we borrowed £3.2 billion more than we thought last year, and £11.6 billion more than the £116 billion Osborne told us we would in his first budget. It also turns out, incidentally, that Labour borrowed £3.

On Tuesday next week, The Spectator will hold its third annual Schools Revolution conference. On the agenda will be the striking failure of new 'free schools' to keep pace with the rising pupil demand. Michael Gove, the education secretary, will be our keynote speaker. To book tickets, click here. A couple of month's ago, Fraser warned that the recent baby boom would lead to a schools crisis, with demand for places outstripping supply. Today's new figures from the Department for Education show that the crisis has already begun. This year, there are more primary school pupils than there were 30 years ago, but 3,800 fewer primary schools.

Will Mitt Romney choose an ‘incredibly boring white guy’ to be his vice presidential nominee? The main alternative has long been Hispanic Florida Senator Marco Rubio, but ABC’s Jonathan Karl reported yesterday that Rubio is not being vetted by Romney’s VP search team, suggesting that he is not on the shortlist. Karl wrote: ‘Knowledgeable Republican sources tell me that Rubio is not being vetted by Mitt Romney’s vice presidential search team. He has not been asked to complete any questionnaires or been asked to turn over any financial documents typically required of potential vice presidential candidates.

‘You attack poverty by knowing what you do changes the lives of those people.’ In that phrase on this morning’s Today programme, Iain Duncan Smith summed up the difference between his approach to combating poverty and Gordon Brown’s. As Fraser has put it, Brown saw poverty as ‘a statistical game… his great spreadsheet puzzler’. The aim of the game? To reduce the number of people living in households below the ‘poverty line’ — set at 60 per cent of median income. The easiest way to achieve this is to move people from just below the line to just above it by giving them a bit of extra cash (in the form of tax credits). Brown called this ‘lifting people out of poverty’.

Want to know how this year’s race for the White House will end? Then head over to the New York Times’s FiveThirtyEight page, where expert psephologist Nate Silver has just released his model’s forecast. What makes Silver’s analysis stand out from the rest is that it doesn’t just take into account the polls, but also economic indicators (including job growth, inflation and GDP forecasts) that help predict the outcome. And it doesn’t just forecast the national result, but also the result in each of the states — taking into account all sorts of state-specific factors such as previous vote shares and demographics. But perhaps the main strength of the model is that it knows its own weakness.

Two U-turns in 12 hours — even for this government that’s some going. Following George Osborne’s watering down of his VAT changes, Ken Clarke has rowed back some of his ‘secret justice’ proposals. Specifically, the Justice and Security Bill — published today — does not extend closed hearings to inquests, as previously planned. It will still allow Closed Material Procedures to be used in civil cases, but only on ‘national security’ grounds rather than ‘public interest’ ones, and only when a judge — not just a minister — decides that it is necessary. These concessions are being touted as Lib Dem victories, after Nick Clegg and his party vigorously opposed the original plans.

Today’s jobs figures show a 105,000 rise in employment and a 45,000 fall in unemployment, from the final quarter of 2011 to the first quarter of 2012. Welcome news, although both figures are within the margin of error, meaning we can’t say with confidence that employment is indeed higher or that unemployment is lower. But even taking the figures at face value, there’s another cause for concern: the rise in employment is coming in part-time, rather than full-time, jobs.