The line between asylum-seekers and economic migrants is too easily blurred; between the legitimate and the “illegitimate” migrant, even more so. Confusion thrives, not least in a pre-election barrage of competing claims and party political propaganda. By declaring that a Conservative government would set quotas for asylum as well as immigration, Michael Howard and David Davis yesterday contributed to that confusion.

And it is complicated enough already. Migration into Britain encompasses a vast range of people, from new work-permit holders and their dependants (119,180 in 2003), to their spouses and fiancées (35,530 in 2003), EU accession workers (91,000 new registrations between May and September last year, of whom 53,000 had probably already been working here illegally), and asylum-seekers (36,290 applicants in the year to September 2004). The official figures also include students (319,000 in 2003), au pairs (15,300 in 2003), and Commonwealth citizens with UK-born grandparents who come here looking for employment, of whom there were a far from negligible 240,000 in 2003.

To propose to set one quota for “immigration”, another for “asylum”, as the Conservatives suggest, is misguided. The collapse of the Berlin Wall, and conflict from Kosovo to Iraq, has led to asylum applications spiralling, from around 4,000 a year between the 1950s and the late 1980s, to 84,000 in 2002, a figure which fell sharply a year later. Demand for au pairs and the need for other immigrant workers fluctuates too, according mainly to economic circumstances. Britain benefits enormously from these workers, as many people needing a plumber or mechanic, or a nurse, doctor or dentist, will testify. A vibrant economy is a vibrant marketplace for foreign labour. Britain should celebrate its success in attracting so many new workers.

It is the false asylum-seekers and illegal immigrants who do much to damage community relations in the UK, enjoying the benefits of public services without paying their part of the costs. The Government has already shown that by focusing on practical ways to prevent entry and clamping down on fraudulent applications it can tackle false asylum-seekers. The number of asylum applications received in 2003 was 49,405, a fall of 41 per cent from the previous year. Ministers have had significantly less success, however, in ensuring the removal of failed asylum- seekers. Moreover, the success of one fifth of appeals suggests that the initial decision-taking is significantly flawed. All these things merit further attention from ministers.

No official figures exist for illegal immigration, although the Home Office is conducting research into providing an estimate. The failure to provide even a workable estimate feeds into general unease about a loss of control of the system and creates unnecessary concern about immigration in general.

There are real and important issues at stake here, reaching into the heart of Britain’s economy as well as its culture and society. Bandying accusations of racism at Mr Howard does him and the issue disservice. Better that mainstream politicians raise such questions, and loudly, than that they be left to the poisonous whispering campaigns of the likes of the British National Party. Just because he is right to raise the questions does not mean, however, that Mr Howard has all the right answers.