Last Thursday, the Government announced a controversial new immigration deal with France: a ‘one in, one out’ scheme aimed at reducing small boat crossings coming to the UK and breaking the power that smuggling gangs have over these crossings.  

The agreement basically means that the UK and France will swap asylum seekers between them.  For each person that is removed from the UK back to France, one will be allowed to enter the UK from France legally. 

In a press release, Keir Starmer stated: 

‘This ground-breaking deal is a crucial further step in turning the tide on illegal small boat crossings and restoring order to our immigration system.

For the first time, illegal migrants will be sent back to France  – targeting the heart of the gangs’ business model and sending a clear message that these life-threatening journeys are pointless.

By resetting our relationships across Europe we’ve made levels of cooperation possible never seen before. This is about grip not gimmicks, and what serious government looks like – taking down these criminal enterprises piece by piece as we secure our borders …’

What we know about how it will work

Under the new pilot, any asylum seeker who has crossed the Channel can be considered as ‘inadmissible’ and if declared as such, they can be returned back to France. 

Those that are inadmissible will include those that do not have family links in the UK and have crossed over from France by ‘small boat’.  These people will be swapped with asylum seekers in France who have not attempted to enter the UK unlawfully that can show a genuine family link to someone in the UK.  

There are real questions about how the Home Office will choose those to be removed back to France and whether their claims for asylum will receive due process once they get to France. We have recently seen France using tear gas on asylum seekers attempting to cross the Channel. 

Without proper safeguards, there is a risk that people fleeing genuine persecution could be removed without fair hearings. 

A Pilot with Limited Scope

At first glance, the policy appears to shift away from hostile immigration enforcement towards a more measured, cooperative approach. By offering legal routes, the scheme aims to target the people smugglers and provides a safer path for refugees.

But the details reveal a far more limited ambition. The current plan reportedly aims for fifty legal admissions per week in exchange for fifty removals.  This year more than 21,000 people have made the journey across the Channel so far.  Therefore, even if fully implemented, the scheme would cover only a small fraction of the people making the journey.

It is not clear how the Home Office will choose those that are potentially inadmissible and removed under this policy, given the large numbers this involves. This raises serious questions about who will be deemed worthy of remaining and who will be removed.  

Symbolism Over Substance?

What does it mean to swap people between countries like they are products to be traded.  The system risks creating even more unfairness  and punishing those without access to safe and legal routes.  

The recent experience of the operation of an ‘inadmissibility’ scheme has been very troubling.  This language was recently used in the barbaric Rwanda scheme, where asylum seekers were held in limbo for years, fearing removal to Rwanda in a scheme that was later declared unlawful.  

This ‘one in, one out’ policy appears to be more about headlines than any real change. Every day we see more racist attacks on asylum seekers and other migrants.  This policy appears to pander to those racist attitudes by again appearing to be tough on immigration without a real workable humane plan to meet the scale of the challenge.   

Legal and Ethical Questions

Asylum seekers make perilous journeys to reach the UK because they are desperate for safety.  They often choose to come to the UK because they feel an affinity with the UK, as they come from countries that the UK previously colonised and therefore speak English. 

As conflicts continue to rage across the world and we are increasingly seeing a cut in overseas aid budgets, we are likely to continue to see high numbers of people attempting to reach safety.   By creating more ways to stop these routes, people will continue to be pushed into taking even more dangerous routes to reach the UK.

What we need to see is a comprehensive policy where more safe pathways are created with international cooperation if there is going to be any serious attempt to tackle smuggling gangs.  

What you need to do now?

There is no suggestion that this new policy will target those asylum seekers already in the UK.  This is likely to only target those that arrive after the policy comes into force.  

The EU still needs to agree the scheme before it moves forward into agreed policy. It is not clear when this will be but this potentially could come into force over the next few weeks.  

Anyone entering the UK by small boat after the policy comes into operation could be at risk of being declared inadmissible and at risk of removal back to France.  

For those that remain in France with genuine family connections to the UK, this may be a good opportunity to evidence those connections if the intention is to join them in the UK.  

Conclusion

While the ‘one in, one out’ plan may signal a shift towards more managed migration, its limited scale, legal uncertainty and risk of displacing problems rather than solving them, raises serious doubts. 

What’s needed is a genuinely cooperative, humane, and large-scale strategy—not another short-term fix dressed up as policy innovation and pandering to the high levels of racism that we are seeing constantly targeted towards migrants.