Remember all those stories about the horrendous numbers of asylum seekers flooding the country? Well it appears that the net inflow of people into the UK in 2002 was actually down from 2001.

The Financial Times 14.11.03 page 5, column 8. Headline: Migrant arrivals offset by surge in outflow

Intro: The net inflow of migrants to the UK fell last year partly because of a sharp rise in the number of people leaving the country, official estimates showed yesterday.

The Office for National Statistics said that in 2002 an estimated 153,000 more people arrived than left. That is down on the 2001 total of 172,000 and the 163,000 of both 1999 and 2000.

The number of immigrants rose to 513,000 in 2002 from 480,000 the previous year, and almost double the 265,000 recorded in 1993. But the number leaving jumped from 308,000 in 2001 to 359,000 last year. Of those half were British citizens

The story claims the new data comes after Blunkett told Newsnight There was no obvious limit to the number of migrants who could settle in the UK, and Beverly Hughes, immigration minister said well-managed immigration is vital to UK economic and social interests, and then shadow home secretary, David Davis, claims the government was expanding the scope of legal migration to cover up its failure to tackle abuse of the asylum system.

Story claims that a third of migrants were Commonwealth citizens and 12% were from the EU. Eighteen per cent were British citizens returning to the UK, down 4% from 2001.

So it now appears that the numbers flooding into the UK in 2002 was actually down on 2001, and also down on 2000 and 1999. The usual message about Britain being a small country with limited resources had failed to notice that more left in 2002 than in 2001.

The fact that the net inflow is down is crucial because one of the main arguments of the anti-immigration campaigning papers is that the vast increase in the numbers coming in places an ever increasing strain on our educational, health and accommodation resources. If the total inflow is falling, then this pressure must also be falling

However, predictably, the Mail, Express and Sun have very different stories. Though The Daily Express at least admits that a lot have also left. Its headline 14.11.03 page 11 is: Record numbers flood into Britain& and record number of Brits LEAVE and is set over a chart comparing immigration to the UK and Britons leaving Britain in 1993 and 2003

Intro: Record numbers of foreigners came to live in the UK last year, while Britons emigrated in unprecedented droves, official figures revealed yesterday.

The huge population flux saw almost 420,000 immigrants entering the country to stay for at least a year and 186,000 British citizens leaving, suggesting increasing numbers are fed up with life here.

A record number of foreigners who were living here also departed, while 95,000 Britons who lived abroad came home, the Office of National Statistics estimates showed.

The final balance of all the comings was a rise of 245,000 in the UKs foreign born population and a fall of 91,000 in its native population. But that is almost double what it was just a year earlier

The story goes on to quote shadow home secretary David Davis, Sir Andrew Greene of Migrationwatch and Mark Oaten, Liberal Democrat shadow home affairs and immigration minister, Beverley Hughes, against and for, the governments new policy of “managed migration”.

What The Express doesnt admit is that the net inflow is actually the lowest for four years. It claims a 245,000 increase in Britains immigrant population came from countries outside Europe: 77.000 from New Commonwealth countries like India, Pakistan and Zimbabwe, 23,400 from English speaking nations like Australia and Canada and 132,000 from other countries. .

Interesting that it uses the term English speaking nations the government release distinguishes between New Commonwealth and Old Commonwealth. The fact that people from India and the Anglophone parts of Africa are very likely to speak English escapes it. Of course it cannot use the term it might like to use to describe the Old Commonwealth, White Commonwealth