The Problem and Response

Since 2018, the number of migrants who have arrived in the U.K. by small boat has drastically increased. These boats are small vessels used by individuals to cross the English Channel, allowing them to enter the U.K. without a visa or permission to enter. Since 2020, small boats have accounted for 89% of irregular arrivals in the U.K. The House of Commons Library reported that in 2025, 41,472 people arrived in the U.K. by crossing the Channel, the second-highest number on record after 2022. Between 2018 and 2025, roughly 193,000 people were detected as reaching the U.K. in small boats.

Many of those entering the U.K. via small boat are asylum seekers. Between April 1st, 2025 and March 31st, 2026, the Home Office reported that 42% of asylum seekers (or 38,980 individuals) arrived by small boat. Despite the high numbers who have successfully made the crossing, this method is extremely dangerous, with 162 people reported dying in the Channel between 2018 and 2025.

The small boat route emerged due to increased enforcement of other unauthorized modes of entry into the U.K., such as lorries and trains. After 2014, the British and French governments invested in enhanced security around French ports and the Eurotunnel. Brexit has also complicated the situation, as it ended the U.K.’s legal agreements to send migrant seekers back to the E.U. country where they first arrived.

As a result, illegal migration has become one of the U.K.’s most important political issues. In response to the crisis, former U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron negotiated the “one in, one out” agreement, which went into effect on August 6th, 2025. This scheme allows the U.K. government to return some of those who cross the Channel into the U.K. back to France. In exchange, a comparable number of asylum seekers in France who have family connections in Britain are legally brought to the U.K. The goal is that this agreement deters asylum seekers from crossing the Channel in small boats.

So far, about 4% of small boat arrivals have been returned to France under the one in, one out deal. As of June 30th, 2026, the U.K. Home Office reported that 1,117 individuals were transferred to the U.K. and 1,087 individuals returned to France.

Criticisms

Despite the one in, one out scheme, almost 50 asylum seekers deported have been recorded as returning to the U.K. a second time. This does not include those who return to the U.K. undetected, with asylum seekers estimating that the actual number may be closer to 200. In response, the one in, one out agreement has been amended so that second-time returnees to the U.K. will be sent back to France.

One in, one out is intended to create safe, legal routes for people to migrate to the U.K. However, for one person to be safely relocated to France, another must embark on a dangerous journey across the English Channel, have their asylum claim denied, be detained, and then deported to France. Safe routes that put some in danger at the expense of others are not true safe routes.

While the rationale for sending migrants to France is that France is a safe country, many migrants who have returned to the U.K. have reportedly faced threats from people smugglers in France. As one man who returned to the U.K. recounted to the Guardian, “When we were returned to France we were taken to a shelter in Paris. I didn’t dare to go out because I was afraid for my life. The smugglers are very dangerous. They always carry weapons and knives. I fell into the trap of a human trafficking network in the forests of France before I crossed to the U.K. from France the first time.”

Migrants have voiced concerns that of all of the asylum seekers in the U.K., only those involved in the arbitrary selection for the scheme are held in detention. One detainee said, “We are asylum seekers. We are not criminals, we are not animals. Between 41,000 people who crossed the Channel, why [are just 200 of us] in detention? End the detention of asylum seekers.” Asylum seekers have also reported other human rights concerns. In January 2026, eighty asylum seekers accused the Home Office of subjecting them to “arbitrary detention, denial of legal representation, inadequate medical care, degrading treatment, and severe psychological harm.” They have also raised concerns of individuals experiencing mental health crises, being afforded inadequate time to recover from their traumatic journeys, and not being allowed to see or speak with their families.

More than 100 asylum seekers held at two detention centers peacefully protested these conditions in January 2026. They were met with riot shields, dogs, and tear gas. The use of force in response to peaceful protests is unacceptable and violates the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.

International organizations have also reported human rights concerns. The Human For Rights Network has received testimonies from asylum seekers in the U.K. of exploitation by smugglers in northern France. After visiting asylum seekers returned to France under one in, one out, Maddie Harris, the founder and director of Humans For Rights Network, stated that these asylum seekers “have witnessed or experienced violence and exploitation perpetrated by smugglers and traffickers. This includes people being forced or coerced into steering a boat, the use of physical violence, servitude, beatings, stabbings and sexual violence.” In February 2026, the U.N. called on the U.K. and France to halt the system, warning that there could be “serious violations of international human rights law.” Concerns included the apparently arbitrary nature of selecting who is detained and forced to return to France versus who is allowed to have their asylum claims processed in the U.K., the treatment of people placed in detention, and a lack of due process.

Meanwhile, there is conflicting evidence surrounding the effectiveness of one in, one out. While small boat crossings have reduced by about 43% this year, this is likely due to a variety of factors. These include bad weather, fewer migrants arriving in Europe overall, and efforts to disrupt people smugglers. The government has scaled up existing enforcement efforts by focusing more resources on disrupting smuggling operations and supply chains, expanding cooperation with police forces in the E.U., reaching new agreements with countries of transit, and introducing new sanctions against smugglers. Furthermore, the government negotiated a change in French maritime law to allow for the interception of boats at sea in limited circumstances. There has been a sharp decline generally in detected unauthorized border crossings into the E.U., falling 26% in 2025 before declining another 37% in the first half of 2026. Between these factors and the fact that only 4% of those arriving by small boat have taken part in the scheme, it is unlikely that one in, one out has had a significant deterrence effect on migration.

Moreover, the scheme faces ongoing legal challenges. Lawyers can seek to block the deportation of children, as well as clients who have family members in the U.K., have mental health issues that could be exacerbated by removal to France, or were a victim of human trafficking. However, not all migrants are granted legal representation or adequate time to respond to deportation. With only 14 days between asylum claim denial and deportation, and limited access or knowledge of legal resources, it will be difficult for migrants to have their claim properly considered.

In July 2026, a High Court ruling determined that the Home Secretary’s decision to reduce protections for potential trafficking victims being considered for removal was unlawful. Another ruling in August 2026 required that an alleged victim of trafficking who was removed to France be returned to the U.K. These challenges have raised the question of whether the scheme is worth the trouble and if the policy inherently infringes on migrants’ rights.

Solutions

Many of those who cross the English Channel are fleeing oppressive regimes, civil wars, and other horrific conditions. In addition, many asylum seekers choose to travel to the U.K. specifically because they have family ties or they speak English. These people must be treated with respect. It is essential that the U.K. and France immediately launch an investigation into the human rights concerns reported by asylum seekers and international organizations. Until a thorough investigation is completed, the one in, one out scheme should be halted to prevent any further human rights concerns.

The U.K. government also must create safe routes for asylum seekers. This will offer migrants a legitimate opportunity to seek asylum in the U.K., while deterring them from making the dangerous Channel crossing. These safe routes must be accessible for all groups who may need to claim asylum, not just a select few. For example, the Migration Observatory reports that few Ukrainians have been detected crossing the Channel in small boats due to the uncapped visa scheme for the group. However, Afghans are one of the most common nationalities detected crossing because there are limited resettlement schemes available to them. In addition, the U.K. should strengthen cooperation with countries close to the English Channel, including France, Belgium, and the Netherlands, to prevent small boat crossings and stop smugglers.

The U.K. also needs to create fair opportunities for all to have their asylum claims heard. This includes ensuring migrants have legal representation, their basic needs met, and a safe place to live in the meantime. The arbitrary choice of who is sent back to France is unfair to those selected, while the 14-day window is insufficient for migrants to have their claim properly considered.

Furthermore, the U.K. government should focus on integrating asylum seekers into society. The Migration Policy Institute has found that migration can boost the economy by expanding the labor force and increasing consumer spending. The U.K. government should organize specialized skills training to help migrants fill labor shortages. Furthermore, similar to the opportunity granted to Ukrainians under the Homes for Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme, the government should grant more visas for vulnerable groups. These visas should allow migrants to work, live, and contribute to society. Meanwhile, housing will not be a concern, as individuals must live with a sponsor. If there are insufficient sponsors, alternative housing can be provided by revamping abandoned buildings into temporary housing. Moving forward, the U.K. needs to pursue immigration policies that prioritize safe routes for immigrants, address humanitarian concerns, and ensure legal representation.