The Conservative MP Glyn Davies, who represents Montgomeryshire, has said he hopes the non-Labour parties refuse to back down.

The Plaid Cymru MP Jonathan Edwards has defended his party’s behaviour in the Welsh assembly, and criticised the Lib Dems for not backing the other non-Labour parties.

Here is a statement from the Labour AM Alun Davies.

This tweet, from April last year, is being cited as evidence that Plaid has broken a promise not to do a deal with the Tories.

But this is about Plaid propping up a Tory government. Today the Tories were voting for Plaid’s Leanne Wood to head a Plaid-led coalition, which is not quite the same thing.

Andrew RT Davies, the leader of the Welsh Conservatives, has just issued this statement.

Since it is hard to read in this form, I will post the quotes separately in a moment.

Under the Welsh assembly’s rules, if it has not elected a first minister within 28 days of the election, there has to be another one.

This is from the Welsh election study’s Roger Scully.

Kirsty Williams, the one Lib Dem member of the assembly, backed Labour’s Carwyn Jones for first minister. This is what she said afterwards.

I was not re-elected into the national assembly to support a ragtag coalition made up of Ukip assembly aembers who at the moment can’t even agree with each other. That is not my politics and not something I will even contemplate.

I am disappointed that Plaid seem to think that is a viable option. The reality that we have to face is that Labour have 29 assembly members.

It is therefore clear that they have the strongest mandate from the people of Wales.

For the record, here are the numbers in the Welsh assembly after last week’s elections. There are 60 AMs (assembly members).

Labour - 29

Plaid Cymru - 12

Conservatives - 11

Ukip - 7

Lib Dems - 1

UPDATE: Plaid’s Elin Jones was elected presiding officer earlier today. Labour’s Ann Jones was elected deputy presiding officer. They do not vote, which is why today’s votes were tied 29/29.

Here is Adrian Masters, ITV Wales’ political editor, on the latest from Cardiff.

Andrew Tyrie goes next.

Osborne says he thinks the economy can be as strong as it is today with net migration below 100,000.

He says if you bring the right migrants in, the economy can be as strong with fewer people.

Steve Baker, a Conservative, goes next.

Q: Can I take you through an analysis of your report by the Spectator’s Fraser Nelson. It is very critical. Do you accept that it is unfair to say we would be £4,3000 poorer.

Osborne says people would be poorer than we would otherwise expect to be.

And there could be other factors that would make the situation worse. There could be a balance of payments crisis.

Q: You have divided GDP per household. Do you accept that is misleading?

Osborne says you cannot pretend that people are not affect by what happens to national GDP.

Q: The number of people in the UK is due to rise. Yet you are using current household figures, not 2030 household numbers.

Osborne says it is reasonable to use current figures, to make it clearer.

And he says Baker is assuming immigration would be lower. But the Leave campaign are going around saying more Indians could come to the UK, and more Bangladeshis could come in.

Baker finishes by asking Osborne to comment on Nelson’s conclusion. Nelson wrote.

So having established 1) a means of dressing up an increase as a decrease and 2) a bogus conflation of GDP with household income and 3) a way of covering up the immigration-driven surge in households Osborne comes up with his grand deception: “Britain would be permanently poorer if we left the European Union, to the tune of £4,300 for every household in the county. That’s a fact everyone should think about as they consider how to vote.”

Osborne says not for the first time he does not agree with Nelson, although he admires his journalism.

UPDATE: This is from the Independent’s Ben Chu.

Osborne says it was reasonable for the Treasury to assume it could take 15 years to negotiate free trade deals that would replicate what Britain has now. In fact, that timetable is rather optimistic, Osborne says.

The Sun’s Tom Newton Dunn says Downing Street specifically denied earlier this week that it was doing contingency planning for Brexit.

Q: Are you in discussions with the DMO?

Osborne says it is already known that the DMO has changed the date of gilt auctions around the time of the EU referendum.

This is from the BBC’s Kamal Ahmed.

Q: In your interview with Robert Peston at the weekend you said house prices might fall if the UK left the EU. What is your evidence for that?

Osborne says the Treasury report into the short-term impacts of Brexit coming out in the next fortnight will look at the impact on house prices. But he was referring to external commentary on this.

Q: What would the impact be on foreigners buying homes in the UK?

Osborne says if the value of the pound fell, it would be even easier for foreigners to buy UK property.

Rachel Reeves, the Labour MP, goes next.

Q: Do you accept that interest rates could fall if the UK left the EU?

Osborne says the Bank of England would have to make a trade off between loosening interest rates, to stop the economy slowing down, and increasing them to tackle the likely increase in inflation.

Q: Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of England, said raising rates at a time of slow down might be a mistake. So could rates fall.

Osborne says he is reluctant to talk about rates.

But the Bank would have to make quite a difficult trade off.

Q: The Sunday Times reported at the weekend that Carney has been sounding out banks to see if their balance sheets could cope with a rate fall.

Osborne says monetary policy makers would have difficult decisions to make.

Andrew Tyrie says he is not saying the Treasury document is “completely worthless”. It has some value, he says. But he says it is worth stressing too that exercises of this kind (ie, trying to forecast the economy 15 years ahead) have their limitations.

Osborne says it is his job as chancellor to explain to people the consequences of the decision they will make. And he has to do so in terms people understand.

If he had highlighted the figures at the top end of the range, that might have been unfair.

But he chose the figure in the centre of the range.

Jacob Rees-Mogg goes next.

Q: Your models, in the Treasury report, imply that we would place tariffs on imports. That would not happen, would it?

Mark Bowman, the Treasury’s director general, international and EU, who is giving evidence with Osborne, replies. He says World Trade Organisation rules imply there would be tariffs.

Rees-Mogg says it would be open to the UK not to impose tariffs on imports from the EU. We are a free trade nation, and historically have rejected this approach.

Osborne says some Leave campaigners have said the UK would impose tariffs, for example on things like Chinese steel, if it left the EU.

Andrew Tyrie goes next.

Q: Is it true to say you are not setting great store by the £4,300 figure?

Osborne says it is the central figure in a range. It helps the public understand what is at stake.

Q: Do you accept that gravity models [a reference to the economic model used by the Treasury to assess the impact of Brexit] are flawed.

Osborne says models are models. But he also listens to what people say, like those investors saying they would not invest in the UK if it left the EU.

Osborne says cutting ourselves off from our largest market will not help productivity growth.

Q: But what if the regulatory burden outweighs the productivity advantages to be gained from free trade.

Osborne says he agrees that the EU needs to deregulate.

But in some areas the UK parliament has decided to go further than the EU in regulations. For example, maternity rights are stronger in the UK than the EU requires.

He says the Leave campaign quote a figure for the regulatory burden of the EU, and their figures cover maternity regulation, environmental regulation and banking regulation, all areas where the UK has decided to go further than the EU requires.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, a Conservative, goes next.

He turns to the assumptions made in the Treasury’s report on Brexit.

Q: The Treasury report implies that the removal of trade barriers boosts productivity. In that case, why did productivity increase by 3.8% a year in the decade before the UK joined the EEC, but only 1.8% a year in the decade after.

Osborne says in the 1970s the UK economy was hit by all sorts of problems, including very poor labour relations.

With no trade barriers, you will do more trade. And more trade will lead to higher productivity.

Q: That is true if other things are equal. But they are not. After 1992 productivity went down again.

Osborne says productivity moves in cycles.

He says completing the single market would lead to another boost in productivity.

Osborne says the Leave campaign have not said what immigration policy might be after Brexit, or what trade deals might apply.

Osborne says, when looking at the economic impact of Brexit, it is important to consider the weight of evidence.

He says a forthcoming Treasury document, looking at the short-term impact of Brexit, would look at the impact on wages.

(The document published by the Treasury last month only looked at the long-term economic impact.)

Stephen Hammond, a Conservative, goes next.

Q: What did the Treasury mean when it said households could be worse off by £4,300 a year by 2030 if the UK left the EU?

Osborne explains that this is the central number in a range.

Q: Many people reading that will think that is what households will lose. But it not a household income figure, is it. It is a figure equating to lost GDP.

Osborne says that that is right, but that households could see their income fall. Different households would be affected in different ways from lower GDP.

Osborne says there is a vast gulf between the claims from the government, and the “specious” claims being made by Leave, such as the one about the UK saving £350m a week if it left the EU.

Andrew Tyrie, the Conservative chair of the committee, starts.

Q: You say that, if the UK objects to a proposal from the EU, the renegotiation means it can force it on to the agenda for the European Council.

George Osborne says, under the terms of the renegotiation, an issue would go to Ecofin first. Then the UK has the right to “request” for it to go to the European Council (the meeting of EU leaders, where matters are normally decided by unanimity). Osborne says the Treasury’s view is that it is inconceivable that such a request would be denied.

Tyrie says it does look, to any reasonable observer, that Osborne has “over-egged it”.

• Tyrie accuses Osborne of exaggerating the strength of one of the assurances David Cameron secured to stop the UK being outvoted by Eurozone countries in EU negotiations.

Tyrie says some other claims, such as the one about Brexit increasing the chances of conflict, seem “overdone”.

The PMQs questions from Angus Robertson, the SNP’s leader at Westminster, get left out from the minute by minute coverage because they coincide with my writing the snap verdict, but I know from comments BTL that readers are interested, so this is what he said.

Robertson started off by mentioning the SNP’s election victory.

The prime minister’s government was elected with 37% of the vote so I’m sure he would acknowledge the success of Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP on being returned victoriously for a third time with 46% of the vote.

He then asked about claims that the UK was enabling corruption in Nigeria.

David Cameron replied:

I’m delighted to congratulate Nicola Sturgeon on her victory in the Scottish elections, as I’m sure he’d want to congratulate Ruth Davidson on her stunning performance ... The SNP have gone from majority to minority, while the Conservatives have gone from coalition to majority. Next week he can get up and ask me how we’re getting on with ordering more pandas for Edinburgh Zoo.

He also said the anti-corruption was intended to help countries like Nigeria deal with the problem.

Then Robertson asked about the police investigations into allegations that the Tories broke election law by overspending in constituencies.

It’s very serious, so how is it that a Conservative crime and policing commissioner can serve in such a role while being under police investigation.

Cameron replied:

The Electoral Commission is independent and when it comes to operational decisions by a police force, that is independent too - that’s the hallmark of an uncorrupt country.

Labour’s Andrew Gwynne asks for an assurance the the government will not force the BBC to sell of any of its commercial assets.

Whittingdale does not answer directly. He says it is important for the BBC to exploit its commercial assets properly, so as to reduce the pressure on the licence fee.

And that’s it. The BBC UQ is over.

Whittingdale says he has “no ambition to become the fat controller”.

Whittingdale says transparency in relation to salaries is important. MPs and others in senior jobs in the public sector have their pay figures published. He says he would like to see as much transparency as possible in the BBC.

Whittingdale says there will be a further review of S4C, the Welsh language channel, after the BBC’s charter has been renewed.

Labour’s Barry Gardiner says last year the government agreed with the BBC that there would be no top-slicing of the BBC. Does that agreement still apply?

Whittingdale says the agreement reached last year still stands.

Labour’s Chris Leslie asks Whittingdale for an assurance that he will not listen to all the “cranks” who always criticise the BBC.

Whittingdale says he has no wish to “hobble” the BBC. He has tried to listen to all views, he says.

Labour’s David Lammy says there is just one ethnic minority person on the BBC board.

Whittingdale says he has sympathy with this point. He says diversity is very important to the BBC.

Sir Peter Bottomley, a Conservative, asks when the future of Channel 4 will come up for review.

Whittingdale says he is looking at this. He wants to publish his plans “as soon as possible”.

Labour’s Mary Creagh says parents value the BBC’s children’s progammes, because they are ad-free. If it is not broken, there is no need to fix it.

Whittingdale says he also supports the BBC’s children programming, particularly because commercial broadcasters are getting out of this. He hopes she will find reassurance in the white paper.

Ben Bradshaw, the Labour former culture secretary, says some of the pre-briefing has not helped Whittingdale’s cause. If there is anything in the white paper that threatens the independence of the BBC, he will have the fight of his life.

Whittingdale says he is committed to the editorial independence of the BBC, and hopes Bradshaw will find the reassurance he wants in the white paper.

The SNP’s John Nicholson asks for an assurance there is no truth in the suggestion that Whittingdale wants to stop the BBC showing popular programmes.

Yes, says Whittingdale.

Kenneth Clarke, the Conservative former chancellor, asks Whittingdale to ensure him the white paper will contain no threat to the BBC.

Whittingdale says he also always said editorial independence is very important. He says the white paper is intended to strengthen it.

Whittingdale is replying to Eagle.

He says he will not reveal the contents of the white paper until tomorrow.

But he can assure Eagle that her three concerns will be met.

He says some of the stories about the white paper in the papers are “complete fantasy”.

Other stories are reasonably well-informed, but did not come from him or from his department, he says.

Maria Eagle says the BBC is remarkably popular.

Whittingdale seems to be showing implacable hostility to the BBC. He wants to denigrate the BBC, and control it.

A good charter should guarantee the BBC’s financial independence and editorial independence, and allow it to carry on fulfilling its mission to inform, educate and entertain.

Does Whittingdale accept that his plan to appoint a majority of the BBC board suggests h wants to control programme making? This would be catastrophic for the BBC’s reputation, he says.

She says the BBC does a brilliant job. It has been reported today that Whittingdale wants to rewrite the BBC’s mission. Labour will oppose this. Whittingdale claims to support the BBC. But he told students recently its disappearance would be a “tempting prospect”.

John Whittingdale, the culture secretary, says he will be publishing the white paper and making a statement on it tomorrow.

He says the government has carried out one of its most thorough consultations on its plans.

Tim Farron, the Lib Dem leader, is called.

There is a lot of jeering.

John Bercow intervenes: “However irritating the right honourable gentleman may be ...”

This generates lots of cheering.

Bercow goes on: “ ... to government backbenchers.”

Bercow tells MPs to be quiet.

Farron asks Cameron if he will apologise for how the Tories campaigned against Sadiq Khan.

Cameron says this is a great way to end the session - getting a lesson in clean campaigning from the Liberal Democrats.

Labour’s Louise Haigh asks about ITV staging a drama based on the real life experience of one of her constituents. The family are opposed to this. What can be done to stop this?

Camerons says he will discuss this with John Whittingdale, the culture secretary.

Gill Furniss, the new Labour MP for Sheffield Brightside and Hillsborough (she was elected last week) asks Cameron if he will back calls for an inquiry into police behaviour at Orgreave.

Cameron says Theresa May, the home secretary, is considering this.

Philip Davies, a Conservative, says he backs Cameron for what he said about Nigeria and Afghanistan. Why is Britain giving them aid? And where is the EU in Cameron’s league table of corruption?

Cameron says the leaders of Nigeria and Afghanistan are working hard to tackle corruption. But, unlike Davies, he thinks it important to give aid to these countries.

Hywel Williams, the Plaid Cyrmu MP, asks if the UK government would replace the funding Wales would lose if the UK left the EU.

Cameron says he cannot give that guarantee. Our economy and tax receipts would be hit if we left, he says.

Labour’s Karen Buck asks why the government is opposing a Labour amendment to the housing bill that would effectively implement one of the Tories’ manifesto promises on affordable housing.

Cameron says the bill will ensure that for every housing association home sold, two more will be built. He says the fact Labour is opposing this shows they are an enemy of aspiration.

Lucy Allan, a Conservative, says the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg has been subject to an online, sexist hate campaign. Will Cameron condemn that?

Cameron says some of the things said on Twitter are appalling. People should be ashamed of the sexist abuse on there.

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, a Conservative, asks if the government will honour its promise to give everyone access to superfast broadband.

Cameron says Clifton-Brown will have to wait until the Queen’s speech.

The SNP’s Gavin Newlands says Cameron used to say he was worried about the UK becoming a surveillance bill. Why has Cameron changed his views so much?

Cameron says he does not agree with Newlands’ portrayal of the communications bill. Should criminals be able to keep their information private because they are using the internet, not a phone? No, he says.

Alan Mak, a Conservative, asks about business expansion in his constituency. Cameron welcomes this.

The SNP’s Roger Mullin asks Cameron if he agrees much more needs to be done to help Syria.

Cameron says it is very difficult to get aid into Syria. And he says Daesh are not just recruiting people because they can pay them. We need to understand the nature of that extremism too.

Labour’s Sir Keir Starmer says many of the people coming to his constituency surgeries have been housing association tenants in tears about the prospect of being made homeless.

Cameron says there are many things there that will help them, such as the right to buy for housing association tenants, and Help to Buy, and the investment in starter homes, that will be cheaper. And estates will be regenerated.

Corbyn says Cameron said he welcomed EU plans on country-by-country tax reporting. But Tory MEPs voted against these plans. There will be another vote. Will Tory MEPs back these measures?

Cameron says the most important thing is that the government supports them. He says he and Corbyn probably disagree on one point; Cameron says he does not believe there should be minimum tax levels. If Corbyn wants to swap information about MEPs’ voting records, he has got lots of information on Labour, he says.

Corbyn says there is concern about unaccompanied child refugees coming across Europe. He says he got a letter from a volunteer about this. Will Cameron confirm that there will be “no delay whatsoever” in Britain taking in these children.

Cameron says the government will follow the Dubs amendment. It is now the law of the land. But it says the government must consult before taking these children in, to ensure councils are able to take them in. He says children with connections to the UK can already come here. Some 30 children have come since February.

Corbyn again asks Cameron to confirm that the government will back the posting of workers’ directive. He asks about Patrick Minford’s views on the EU.

Cameron says he completely disagrees with Minford, because Minford wants to see manufacturing in the UK “obliterated”. He says he wants to see the City continue creating jobs. He says he hopes he and Corbyn can agree on this.

Corbyn says he asked about UK tax havens which receive large sums of money from dodgy sources and which should be closed down.

Cameron says this government has done more than any other government to ensure overseas territories are not tax havens, and behave in a responsible way. Of course the government would like them to go further, and have public registers of beneficial ownership. But Labour never achieved this. And some of them are releasing more information than developed countries.

Jeremy Corbyn says since we often celebrate national events, will Cameron congratulate Sir David Attenborough on his 90th birthday and thank him for all he has done for environmental awareness.

He says the EU has strengthened workers’ rights. Earlier this year it put forward plans to close loopholes in the posting of foreign workers’ directive.

Cameron agrees with Corbyn on Attenborough. He says he is pleased the Arctic survey ship will be named after him.

He says the government sees “some merit” in the EU plans. The “yellow card” process has been invoked. But the best thing for workers has been the “national living wage”.

Corbyn says Labour created the minimum wage. The “national living wage” is a corruption of it, and not a proper living wage. Will the government support the EU reform?

Cameron says there is merit in the idea, and the government is working with the Dutch presidency on it. But it is important to get it right. He says it is wrong for Corbyn to describe the “national living wage” as a corruption. It has given workers a big pay rise.

Cameron says the government is building more homes, and more affordable homes. He says he hopes the Labour party and the Lords will stop blocking its bill.

Labour’s Mike Kane says even “fantastically corrupt” Nigeria wants Britain to clean up its act and provide registers of beneficial ownership for overseas territories.

David Cameron says he will deliver that.

Diane Abbott, the shadow international development secretary, has put out a statement implying that David Cameron is the wrong person to be hosting tomorrow’s anti-corruption summit. She said:

The Tory government hosting an anti-corruption summit is like putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop.

The government is refusing to take meaningful action to close Britain’s constellation of tax havens, which together constitute the largest financial secrecy network in the world. By keeping them open the government risks of being seen as complicit in facilitating tax avoidance, corruption and crime.

As Labour has long been calling for, what is needed are public registers of beneficial ownership in Britain’s overseas territories and crown dependencies. The prime minister used to agree. In 2014, he said he supported making company beneficial ownership information open to the public. But he has consistently failed to take real action, even in the wake of the Panama Papers leaks.

More from Rowena Mason on the Vote Leave battlebus.

This is from my colleague Rowena Mason, who is covering Boris Johnson’s Vote Leave battlebus tour.

Boris Johnson claimed the leave campaign had the passion and energy to succeed against the “big battalions” of government spending on the remain side.

Giving an impromptu stump speech in Truro, Cornwall, he said: “Isn’t it wonderful to see our battle bus which is not funded by the taxpayer unlike that £9m government propaganda for the remain side...

“Believe me, there are hundreds of millions of people who share our views across the whole wonderful European continent and think that Europe and the EU are no longer the same thing and it is the EU going in the wrong direction. I hope we can build a movement. They think they’ve got the big battalions, they’ve got all the taxpayers money; we’ve got the passion, we’ve got commitment and we’ve got right on our side. Fight for our democracy, folks, on June 23 and let’s make sure June 24 is Independence Day for Britain.”

The former London mayor also claimed it was “absolutely crazy” that the EU was dictating specifications for vacuum cleaners and the size of bananas.

He was mobbed by supporters and media as he launched the Vote Leave tour from the town’s marketplace, where he waved a Cornish pasty for the cameras and bought some asparagus.

The Vote Leave bus was branded with the campaign’s claim that leaving the EU would save £350m a week that could be spent on the NHS, which has been widely discredited because it does not take the UK’s rebate into account.

Defending the use of the statistic, Johnson insisted that amount was “spent by EU bureaucrats according to their whim and their decisions.”

Former head of MI5 Eliza Manningham-Buller this morning joined the battle between spooks over UK membership of the European Union, coming out in favour of staying in on security grounds.

“Now is not the time to back away from Europe,” she said in a speech at the foreign affairs think-tank Chatham House.

Manningham-Buller, who led MI5 between 2002 and 2007, said she had resisted speaking out on a regular basis since leaving office.

But she said she could no longer remain silent when the Leave campaign was making what she described as “nonsensical claims”. She was particularly unhappy about a junior minister who said the UK did not have the freedom within the EU to make its own intelligence alliances and to decide who to share intelligence with,

She lines up with the former head of MI6 Sir John Sawers and another former head of MI5 Sir Jonathan Evans and opposed to former MI6 Sir Richard Dearlove, who argues in favour of leaving.

Manningham-Buller said: “To leave would present real risks to our security and safety.”

She said that the UK, contrary to those arguing in favour of leaving the EU, remained independent in dealing with intelligence and took its own decisions on which countries to share intelligence with.

She said that if the UK was to pull out of the EU, the UK’s influence would wane. Day-to-day connections with other European countries were more likely to be relevant than with the US: what is happening in Copenhagen in terms of terrorism is more likely to matter than what is happening in Chicago.

The UK does not have to choose between the US intelligence relationship and the European one: it can have both, she said.

“We have built up a network of relations that would be undermined by Brexit,” she said, adding: “We would put ourselves in greater peril if we seek a divorce.”

Q: What is your view on TTIP?

Brown says there is a “a lot of water still to go under the bridge” on this. There is a debate about what sort of resolution procedure would be used.

He says this should not decide whether people are for or against staying in the EU. And, anyway, it will be decided after the referendum.

And that’s it. There is plenty to unpack in the speech and the Q&A. I will post a summary soon.

Brown says the UK does not know have to make a choice between the Commonwealth and the EU.

Q: [From 5 News’ Andy Bell] Are you convinced Jeremy Corbyn is going to throw himself heart and soul into this campaign?

Brown says Corbyn made an excellent speech putting the case for the EU, and he is going around the country campaigning.

He says non-Tory parties will have to deliver the majority of votes to win the referendum.

Q: What do you think of Mervyn King’s view that the euro will break up?

Brown says Mervyn King says he does not have enough information yet to decide whether to vote to stay in the EU. He says King once told him he needed 200 years’ worth of data to decide whether the UK should join the euro.

Brown says he does not think the euro will break up.

This is not just a multi-speed Europe. We are now in a multi-tiered Europe, he says.

Q: The Leave campaign says we are currently cowed as a nation, but that if we leave, we will suddenly become more powerful. What do you think?

Brown says agrees.

When he was in government there was a plan for a savings tax. People were avoiding tax but moving their money abroad. Someone proposed a savings tax. Brown says he argued that, if there was a uniform tax, people would just move their money to Switzerland. So the answer was automatic exchange of information, he said. He says they were 14 to one against him for a year. But eventually he persuaded the EU to accept his exchange of information plan. Then he argued for a blacklist.

He says you can win your battles in Europe by having the right ideas.

Instead of Europe being on an escalator to centralisation, decision making is now at a inter-governmental level. That is what he means about moving from a United States of Europe to a United Europe of States.

He says we can have a bigger European voice in future.

And we need a Marshall plan for the Middle East. Nato cannot do it, because it is a military organisation. One country on its own cannot do that. And America is only interested to an extent. So Europe needs to get involved. He says Britain could play a large part in shaping that policy.

• Brown says the EU should be promoting a Marshall plan for the Middle East.

Q: You said in your speech Britain’s fight against antisemitism must continue. What is your view of how the Labour leadership is handling this?

Brown says he is not going to become a rent-a-quote during this campaign. But, as prime minister, he spoke in the Knesset in Israel. He says we must speak out strongly against antisemitism. And he says, if Jeremy Corbyn were here today, he would say the same.

Q: [From the FT’s Jim Pickard] There did not seem to be much about immigration in your speech. Many Labour voters want to leave the EU because of this. Have you changed your views on this since your encounter with Gillian Duffy?

Brown says lots of politicians have problems with microphones, including now the Queen.

He says he reads the FT every day. The FT reporting reflects its view that what matters most is what happens to the economy.

But he says there are also cultural issues that the Remain camp needs to address. He writes about this in his Guardian article today, he says.

He says the problem with immigration is to a large extent about illegal immigration. But you can only deal with that through cross-border cooperation. Boris Johnson might say this could happen if Britain were outside the EU. But you need the structures, he says.

He says some people are worried about the impact of immigration on public services, like the health service.

The way to deal with that is not to leave the EU, he says. The way to deal with it is by helping those communities.

Q: Is it a mistake to try to settle a matter like this through a referendum?

Brown says we have to be honest; the referendum is only taking place to settle a dispute within the Conservative party.

But he also says every generation has to make up its mind about Europe.

In 1975 Harold Wilson argued that the benefits of being in Europe were to do with lower food prices. Now the arguments are different. So there is a case for looking at this again.

Brown does not seem to be speaking from a text, but his office has sent out a summary o his arguments. Here is an extract from the news release.

During a launch speech at the London School of Economics, Gordon Brown said:

“When we look at the challenging demands of a global economy and an increasingly insecure and unstable world, the case for British engagement in Europe is even stronger than it was when we first joined the European Economic Community in the 1970s.”

Mr Brown said his primary focus would be on appealing to Labour voters during a series of rallies and speeches over the next six weeks. He will address meetings in London, Birmingham, Liverpool, Coventry and in Scotland.

The former prime minister’s five positives centre around the key pillars of jobs, taxation, terrorism, immigration and workers’ rights.

Specifically, he proposes how harnessing EU co-operation will (1) Create new jobs in Britain by European single market reform; (2) Tackle Europe’s lost trillion from tax avoidance and tax evasion; (3) Combat terrorism and the causes of terrorism with a Middle East and North Africa Plan; (4) Back enhanced European security co-operation against illegal immigration; (5) Create a fairer and more sustainable country by guaranteeing minimum standards in the workplace and addressing climate change.

Here are some of the highlights from Gordon Brown’s speech so far.

Boris Johnson is now being interviewed on Sky News.

He has just said that he thinks all the Remain campaigns talks of “world war three and bubonic plague” etc is “demented”.

• Boris Johnson accuses David Cameron of “demented” scaremongering.

Here is the Vote Leave battlebus that Boris Johnson will be on this morning.

Q: Some people think your comment about President Obama being “part-Kenyan” was racist.

Johnson says the point he was making was that it was “absurd” for the US to say the UK should stay in the EU when it would not give up sovereignty itself.

He says two days ago he made a perfectly sensible remark about the failings of the EU in Ukraine, and that was turned by the Twitter storm ran by the Remain campaign into a claim he was a Putin apologist. He deserves an apology himself, he says.

He says we will have a fantastic future if we leave the EU. And we will continue to be able to take a leading role in the EU.

He ends by joking that Humphrys can “take back” control of the interview.

It is a pointed remark because Johnson has been talking over Humphrys for much of the interview.

Humphrys is a legendary interviewer, but that was not one of his best efforts. We learnt rather little. But I will squeeze it for all the news in a summary in a moment.

Q: People think you are only backing Brexit for selfish reasons. Is it true that you wrote two columns, one backing staying in and one backing Brexit.

Johnson says he has written many columns over the years. He thought long and hard about this. He says he did not want to go against the prime minster, like Michael Gove.

Q: But, unlike Gove, this has not been a long-held matter of principle for you.

Johnson says he has for many years criticised the EU. Since the Lisbon treaty his position has been hardening and hardening.

Q: In 2012 you said you would be up for making the positive case for the EU.

Johnson says the single market system has been “kidnapped”. It is now manifest that the European court of justice can adjudicate on matters of justice.

Of course it is a balanced question, he says. People like him and David Owen and John Longworth have moved.

Johnson says it is the lack of control over immigration that is “so corrosive” of trust in democracy, as well as financially damaging.

Q: In your five questions for “Dave”, you said Cameron needed to explain how he would control EU migration into the UK if the UK stays in. But why should we control it if it is good for the UK economy.

Johnson says he is not so sure of that.

He is in favour of immigration. But it is not a good idea not to have control. And it is wrong for politicians to say they can cut migration below 100,000 when they know it cannot be down.

Q: Cameron does not say that now.

Johnson ignores that, and goes on to say it is reasonable to ask about the impact of immigration.

Johnson says if the UK remains in the EU, they will use the institutions of the single market to prop up the euro.

Q: We have got a veto on that.

No we haven’t, says Johnson. He says Cameron’s EU deal removed the UK’s veto from that.

We gave up the veto, he says.

We will end up giving up £100bn to the EU, he says. And we will lose democratic control of our country.

Johnson says he needs to correct Humphrys’ phrasing. It is not a question of being a “member” of the single market.

Q: If we had access to it, we would have to accept free movement.

No, says Johnson. He says the US has access to the single market, but does not allow free movement.

Q: No it doesn’t.

Johnson ignores this, and goes back to the point about the EU restricting growth.

Membership of the single market embroils us in such a wide range of regulation and legislation that it holds back growth, he says.

It’s a busy day, with a lot of activity on the EU referendum front. Gordon Brown is giving a major speech, George Osborne is at the Treasury committee, and Boris Johnson is out campaigning. He is also giving interviews this morning. On BBC Breakfast he defended David Cameron over what Cameron said about Nigeria and Afghanistan being “fantastically corrupt”. Johnson said:

I think the prime minister, as far as I understand it, was speaking very candidly about the problems of global corruption. I think most people will find it refreshing he was speaking his mind. The more people who speak their minds the better, in my view.

And he is about to appear on the Today programme. I will cover that in detail.

Here is the agenda for the day:

8.10am: Boris Johnson is interviewed on the Today programme.

Morning: Johnson campaigns on a Vote Leave battlebus.

9am: Gordon Brown gives a speech on the EU referendum.

9.30pm: Stephen Crabb, the work and pensions secretary, gives evidence to the work and pensions committee.

12pm: David Cameron faces Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs.

12pm: The Electoral Commission publishes information about donations to the EU referendum campaigns.

2pm: George Osborne gives evidence to the Commons Treasury committee about the EU referendum.

I will be focusing mostly on PMQs and the Treasury committee hearing but, as usual, I will also be covering the breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I will post a summary after PMQs and another in the afternoon.

If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m @AndrewSparrow.

I try to monitor the comments BTL but normally I find it impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer direct questions, although sometimes I miss them or don’t have time. Alternatively you could post a question to me on Twitter.

If you think there are any voices that I’m leaving out, particularly political figures or organisations giving alternative views of the stories I’m covering, do please flag them up below the line (include “Andrew” in the post). I can’t promise to include everything, but I do try to be open to as wide a range of perspectives as possible.