The supreme court has erred in backing the unfair government ruling on the £18,600 minimum annual income requirements for entry to the UK of non-EU spouses (Report, 22 February). This ruling has always been morally wrong and unjustified. Contrary to Home Office assertions, it has had negligible impact on the drive to reduce net migration and it has not worked in the national interest. Non-EU spouses have rarely been a burden to UK finances. The standing rule that they are not allowed recourse to public funds is sufficient to cover this.

I brought my Filipino wife here ahead of the ruling, when our income was below the existing threshold. She gained employment immediately, studied intensely, and built herself a good future, buying our house in her own name three years ago. We plan to start a family very soon. Under the current rules, this country would have lost a valuable long-term asset, as it is now doing by effectively barring thousands of willing and able workers and their offspring from the country. It is particularly unfair considering that EU migrants, with no ties or allegiances to the UK, have virtually unrestricted access.

Although I realise that the impact, and ensuing heartache, is greater for those with existing children, I do not accept that couples without children should be any less considered. I doubt, however, if the callous, self-righteous Home Office will rush ahead with any plans to make things any easier, despite their empty utterances on the court’s condemnations.

William Plant

Crook, County Durham

• I read with dismay your report (24 February) on the fall in the net migration figure and the government’s response through the immigration minister, Robert Goodwill, hailing this as a welcome first step in the drive to reduce immigration figures in the long term.

It was reported that the major reason for the reduction in the overall figure was the fall in the number of full-fee-paying non-EU students. It would seem that the government’s zeal in attacking the soft target of international students has paid off handsomely. It is difficult to see how reducing non-EU student numbers by 31,000 with an estimated loss of £1bn to the UK economy and the loss to the UK’s reputation overseas can be seen as a policy triumph. Nor does it sit well with the immigration minister’s claim that “the UK will always welcome those who contribute and benefit our country”. Presumably Mr Goodwill is happy that the many financial and other benefits brought by overseas students can now be enjoyed by America, Australia and our other competitors in the international education market.

David Cronin

Stockport

• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters