The Blair government knew in advance that the Sun newspaper was to launch a week-long campaign on the "immigration crisis" last summer, and immediately moved to neutralise the issue in collaboration with the tabloid, it was claimed yesterday.

The weekly news "grid" produced to maximise the impact of government announcements for the week of August 18 to 24 included a scheduled interview with the home secretary, David Blunkett, in which he promised "tough measures to crack down on asylum cheats", even before the campaign started, according to a book reported in the Mail on Sunday.

Inside Blair's Bunker, a study of the Blair kitchen cabinet, also repeats claims that the prime minister realised that his then-communications director, Alastair Campbell, needed "calming down" during his 2003 battle with the BBC over David Kelly's suicide - and wished Mr Campbell had stepped down sooner.

So distraught was Mr Campbell over BBC claims that No 10 had "sexed up" intelligence data on Iraq knowing it to be false - a charge on which it was acquitted by Lord Hutton - that his rage made some associates fear for his health. "I am trying to calm him down," Mr Blair is quoted as explaining.

The book's co-authors, political journalists Simon Walters and Peter Oborne, both old adversaries of Mr Campbell, repeat charges that the former communications director - a "brilliant but ruthless man" - often dominated Mr Blair, who had run-ins with both Bill Clinton and George Bush over his influence. They also highlight the role of the "grid" used to synchronise government announcements and make sure they do not clash with events that might overshadow them in the wider world, including Bob Hope's memorial service and the world athletics championships in the week starting August 18 last year.

But it was Mr Blunkett's pencilled-in agreement to be interviewed by the Sun before its "Sun Asylum Week" campaign was even launched which yesterday led its tabloid rival, the Mail on Sunday, to publish extracts from the book.

Labour invented the grid in 1998, having returned to office after 18 years to find that Whitehall departments did not know what other departments were doing - in contrast to ever-sharper media planning outside in the era of round-the-clock news. Finding out what newspapers, especially tabloids, and even more importantly, broadcasters, are planning is a significant task for press officers and spin doctors.

"There's a constant battle. Our task is to learn what we can as soon as we can and try to put our best case over," one veteran practitioner said yesterday.

In the case of the Sun's asylum campaign, No 10 knew how sensitive the issue was to many tabloid readers who feel they are competing most sharply with newcomers for jobs and other services.

"The impression given was that the government had acted on the Sun's concerns. The newspaper could boast it had won a significant victory. In fact, the outcome of the week may have been choreographed well in advance," the Mail on Sunday suggested.

Keeping the Rupert Murdoch-owned Sun happy is a key target for Labour strategists, anxious to neutralise the gut-hostility of the tycoon to anything which smacks of the socialism he briefly espoused as a student.

Mr Oborne and Mr Walters also revive the tensions between Cherie Blair and Mr Campbell and his partner, Fiona Millar, an adviser and friend of the Labour leader's wife, who fell out over the influence of Carol Caplin, the "lifestyle guru".
 

Judges are accustomed to being admonished by the lord chancellor for using expressions such as "the nigger in the woodpile".

It might have come as some surprise, however, to be warned yesterday to think twice before uttering the phrase "asylum seeker".

According to new guidance to judges issued yesterday by the lord chief justice, Lord Woolf, "asylum seeker" is now associated with people without a genuine claim to be refugees, and is almost pejorative.

The advice is contained in a book issued by the judicial studies board, which trains judges, and is designed to ensure they are aware of racial and religious sensitivities.

It cautions against using words that imply an "evaluation" of the sexes, however subtle. Among the newly frowned-upon expressions are "man and wife", "girl" (unless speaking of a child) and "businessmen".

The book also advises against using terms such as "mental handicap" and "the disabled", saying that judges should instead use "learning disabilities" and "people with disabilities".

The preface by Mrs Justice Cox, who chairs the board's equal treatment advisory committee, says: "Judges are still, deep down, human beings and creatures of their upbringing, education and experience. Inevitably, we all hold different views and are subject to prejudices to varying degrees."

The book advises judges not to overlook the use - unconscious or otherwise - of gender-based, racist or "homophobic" stereotyping as an "evidential short cut".

Black, they are told, is an adjective and should always be used as such, as in "black person". The same applies to "disabled".

The book says that reference to minority communities as "ethnics" is patronising and should "certainly be avoided".

Launching the book in central London, Lord Woolf said judges were acting and behaving fairly, but should be seen to be doing so.

"While we must treat people equally, of course we are all different and that is part of the rub."
 

Councillors from across the major political parties have called on the police to monitor political candidates that trade on racist or religious hatred to woo voters in the run-up to the June elections.

The public commitment to stay clear of racist and religious intolerance was made yesterday by the Local Government Association, the cross-party body that represents councils, as the parties gear up for the June 10 polls.

Officially, the LGA places its commitment against a "backdrop of controversy on issues such as the Middle East, asylum and immigration".

But its decision to come out against rhetoric aimed at ethnic minorities or religious groups is an attempt to distance itself from the far right British National party, which is fielding a number of candidates for both the local and European elections.

The BNP's manifesto makes explicit commitments to repatriate immigrants and asylum seekers, and put an end to the "second class" experience of "white Britons".

The police will monitor Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green politicians as well as the BNP and other minor parties.

The LGA will also remind the public the police powers which could be readily invoked if candidates incite religious or racist intolerance as a consequence of their campaigning pitch.

The LGA said the political parties it represents would do "what they can to keep hatred out of local politics".

Speaking on behalf of the leaders of all the political groups at the LGA, Sir Jeremy Beecham, the LGA chairman, said: "The only intolerance we should see this summer is that towards individuals or groups who seek to hijack the electoral process for their own extremist aims.

"Democracy relies on free speech, which must be protected. But it also relies on giving equal value to every member of society.

"No one should be allowed to exploit local election campaigns to incite hatred against people just because of the colour of their skin, their religion or national origin. Democrats must be strong and united against anti-democrats.

"We hope that the police will uphold our tradition of election campaigns characterised by tolerance, debate, discussion, and understanding; by using their powers, such as to stop incitement to racial hatred, against extremists of all kinds."

He added: "For our part, will do everything we can to ensure that when we campaign, a clear distinction is drawn between legitimate policy differences, especially sensitive policy areas such as immigration, and anything that threatens everyone's right to be treated equally with respect."

A row over the accuracy of official statistics on asylum seekers yesterday overshadowed the government's attempts to trumpet another fall in the number of applications.

A National Audit Office report said the government's figures dramatically underestimated the number of asylum seekers claiming state benefits.

The report was published at the same time as Home Office figures showing that in the first three months of this year, 10,585 people sought political sanctuary in Britain. That is a 20 per cent fall from the previous three months, when 13,150 applications were record.

Labour leaders are worried that next month's local and European elections could see major gains for the British National Party. David Blunkett, the Home Secretary, yesterday said ministers feel "a genuine worry" about the racist party's election prospects.

Ministers were quick to seize on the fall in applications, arguing the figures were a vindication of the tougher stance announced last year by the Prime Minister.

"These asylum figures show that the dramatic progress that we made last year, when we halved the number of asylum applications, has continued," Tony Blair said.

Mr Blunkett pledged to reduce applications even more. "Within the bounds of not setting impossible targets, it is my view that we can, over the next few months, get them down still further," he said.

While the NAO report gave a clean bill of health to the Home Office figures for applications from people recently arrived, it cast serious doubt on information about people in Britain whose applications are being considered.

According to the NAO study, government data on the number of such people receiving benefit payments and accommodation from the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) do not include up to 23,000 asylum seekers or their children who are supported by local councils. Another 1,000 receive help directly from the Department for Work and Pensions.

Once those people are added to the Home Office's declared figure of 76,000, the total number of asylum seekers getting some sort of state benefit approaches 100,000.

The government data "is misleading because it leaves out a materially significant number of supported asylum seekers from the statistics," the NAO report said. Including all supported asylum seekers would mean "a significant increase in the statistics."

Yesterday's Home Office figures claimed the number of failed asylum seekers who were removed from the UK in the first three months of this year rose to 3,320, up 27 per cent from the first quarter of 2003.

But the NAO auditors also cast doubt on that data. Figures on failed asylum seekers supposedly removed from Britain were "not always satisfactory".

In one in 20 recorded removals, the NAO could find no evidence to prove that the people concerned had indeed left the UK.

"Confusion between immigration officers and enforcement officers over who was responsible for recording a removal once it had taken place," contributed to doubts about deportation figures, the NAO said.

David Davis, the Conservative shadow home secretary, said the flaws in the government figures showed that ministers had not mastered problems over asylum claims. "How can the government claim to have the asylum system under control?" he asked.

He said the greatest flaw in yesterday's report was that it made no estimate of how many failed asylum seekers dropped out of the system and become illegal immigrants.

"Many other countries around the world measure or estimate how many illegals are in their country at any one time. Our government always shies away from these figures," Mr Davis said.

Mr Blunkett later admitted that the government still had not won the battle for public confidence over asylum.

"People do not believe that we have got a grip," Mr Blunkett said. "We have got a long hard haul to demonstrate that we have got a grip on this."

And whatever the government's successes on asylum, Mr Blair seems doomed to get little credit from them, at least for as long as Iraq dominates the political agenda.

The Prime Minister began his monthly press conference at Downing Street yesterday with an upbeat statement about asylum figures.

When the briefing ended more than an hour later, Mr Blair still had not been asked a single question on the controversial topic.