“One In, One Out”: Can this new deal solve the post-Brexit deportation crisis?

The “One In, One Out” deal was announced on 10th July, 2025, during a summit between British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron on his state visit. The deal, which came into force on 6th August, introduced a deportation mechanism for the first time since Brexit and paved the way for a legal pathway to exchange migrants between the two countries.

How does the deal work?

The deal permits the UK to detain immigrants who arrive illegally from France, which it deems a “safe third country”, and to deport them back there if the Home Office considers their asylum claims to be “inadmissible”. The UK must submit a deportation request within 14 days, whereas France needs to respond to this request within 28 days. According to the deal, France will have the right to either accept or reject the request in cases where the individual can pose a threat to its national security. The transportation and logistical costs are to be financed by the UK.

In return for each “inadmissible” migrant being sent back to France, the UK will accept one migrant residing in France who has a familial tie within the UK. These migrants will be able to apply online by submitting their “Expression of Interest”. Once they pass security and eligibility checks and their application is approved by the Home Office, they can join their families in the UK. Initially, a quota of 50 migrants per week has been set for deportation to France.

In addition, migrants arriving by small boats and deported to France will not be eligible to use this legal route. They will be sent back to France again if they make a new attempt to enter the UK. The pilot program is scheduled to run until 11th June, 2026, with its capacity of 50 per week being equivalent to about 2600 immigrants. Unaccompanied minors are not included in the “One In, One Out” deal.

Reactions to the deal on both sides of the Channel

The deal has received mixed reactions both in the UK and France among political circles and the general public. In the UK, the Labour Party hailed the deal, presenting it as a solution complementing its often-used slogan of “order, not chaos” aimed at tackling irregular migration. The same political message was prominent, especially during the elections of 2024, which brought the party back to government after 14 years. Some members of the British public supported the deal, seeing it as a mechanism to manage migration flows and increase the control and security of British borders. On the other hand, the opposition has raised doubts as to the policy’s effectiveness due, in part, to its limited quota. Some civil society representatives also criticised the deal, arguing that it would undermine the rights of migrants and asylum seekers.

In France, the government presented it as a form of burden-sharing with its strategic partner, the UK, in this long-lasting dilemma on deportation and return policies after Brexit. It was a topic of interest for the French, considering the situation in immigration camps on its northern shores and the financial and humanitarian implications on its budget and society. The deal also echoed in the French political spectrum and society in both ways. Some left-wing opposition members remained mainly sceptical, while conservatives defined it as insufficient. A few mayors in the Calais region, which is a departure point where the camps are located, suggested it would encourage even more crossing attempts. Similar to concerns raised in the UK, some rights groups have questioned the deal’s capability to combat human trafficking while safeguarding the rights of migrants and asylum seekers.

Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders) expressed their opposition to the deal in a statement highlighting that the plan would not prevent crossings and could lead to human suffering. A British charity, Asylum Matters, also described it as an attack on the human right to seek asylum, which is guaranteed by the Refugee Convention.

On the other hand, the Refugee Council voiced support, declaring it “an important first step” with caution on its implementation regarding the dignity and respect of asylum seekers. The UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) welcomed the initiative and emphasised the collective commitment of France and the UK in its report. It expressed its hope that this cooperation could pave the way for further collaboration between the UK and the EU. It also emphasised the importance of the deal’s alignment with international law, whilst stressing that its success will depend on the details of its implementation.

What Does the Deal Mean for Migrants?

Some civil society groups and organisations have raised questions on the deal’s implementation.

Under the deal, the immigrants reserve their right to appeal. However, some legal gaps and uncertainties have been pointed out. Scepticism is mainly focused on how effectively the deal will protect the rights of asylum seekers.

For instance, the 14-day period within which the UK must request France’s approval could limit those seeking asylum under detention from being able to use their right to appeal or to access legal advice. This may be especially challenging in cases where people lack proper documentation, such as passports or legal certificates. Last year, small-boat arrivals made up almost one-third of the 108,000 people who applied for asylum in the UK.

An option as a “Safe Route”

Though the deal offers a “safe route” for migrants to reach the UK instead of undertaking the dangerous journey, the quota of 50 people exchanged per week has come under scrutiny. Whether it will truly serve as a deterrent and prevent people from making the crossings remains to be seen.

A British government official recently declared their aim to “dismantle the business model” of the smuggling gangs through this deal. However, the deal’s effectiveness in deterring them and their networks is put into question. These migrants take the dangerous path and set off from France with small inflatable boats, often referred to as “dinghies”. In the year ending March 2025, these small boats accounted for 86% of the total number of irregular arrivals to the UK.

In fact, recent data has suggested a decrease in the price to get a place on one of these boats, contradicting the UK’s efforts to make this perilous and life-threatening journey as costly as possible to deter crossings. The statistics by the Home Office also illustrate that smugglers now put migrants on boats in greater numbers, with an average of 65 people per vessel, greatly exceeding their capacity. This fact further risks the lives of those on board, including children who are the most vulnerable. It is also known by reports of some NGOs that unaccompanied migrant children seeking asylum may be mistakenly classified as adults, as was the case for hundreds of them last year.

The human side

The deal receives criticism on the humanitarian side as well, stressing its impact on the safety and well-being of migrants at the mercy of these smuggling gangs, who are motivated to profit from their desperation and vulnerability. Though the statistics for crossings and arrivals may vary among official numbers, reports, and estimations of NGOs, one thing is certain: people desperately hoping to seek asylum in the UK regularly undertake the perilous journey in these overloaded inflatable boats, lacking in safety measures, and provided by smuggling gangs.

According to a UNHCR report, 21,117 people had already made the crossing by 6th July, while at least 14 of them lost their lives. The figure has now surpassed 29,000. The report also suggests that 2024 was the deadliest year for Channel crossings, with at least 86 deaths linked to crossing attempts. Data from the Missing Migrants Project indicates that the combined number of missing or dead migrants has seen its peak at 243 migrants, including 56 children, in 2024. Deaths linked to hazardous transport and drowning are the two primary causes of death.

Police patrols occur along the French shores to track and identify these gangs. In 2023, the UK pledged €541m to France to boost border controls under a three-year deal, with France pledging its own contribution in return. In February this year, the deal was extended until 2027, and €8 million was redirected to fund stronger enforcement measures. According to “One In, One Out”, the UK will continue to finance border officers and implement other measures, such as increased surveillance.

Dozens of migrants from various nationalities have already been detained in Dover upon their arrival under the pilot scheme. However, the exact numbers have not been shared. They were placed in immigration removal centres waiting to be returned to France. The reciprocal process for migrants in France to apply to go to the UK has also begun.

A timeline of joint efforts to tackle irregular immigration

On the two sides of the Channel, France and the UK have had several bilateral agreements on border immigration controls over the past decades. The Sangatte Protocol from 1991, the Treaty of Le Touquet of 2003, and the Sandhurst Treaty in 2018 were set up to collaborate on this specific matter.

When the UK left the European Union on 31st January 2020, it automatically withdrew from the Dublin system, an EU framework determining the EU state which is responsible for processing the asylum application. It created a legal loophole due to the absence of a proper system for returning migrants to the EU, including France, its neighbour across the Channel. In early 2020, the number of immigrants crossing the Channel in small boats, risking their lives, rose. The immigration flow soon became a source of political tension in 2022.

In the UK, control over immigration played a key role during the 2016 Brexit Referendum, for the Conservative Party and the “Leave” campaigners who adopted the slogan of “Take back control” and advocated for increased regulation of British borders.

Controlling irregular immigration has been addressed by several schemes on the British side, including the “Rwanda plan”. Introduced by the Conservative government, the plan aimed to relocate asylum seekers, who crossed the Channel illegally, to Rwanda. The plan was scrapped in 2023 after the UK courts ruled it unlawful amid criticism from the general public and rights groups.

Too early to judge?

The “One In, One Out” deal is an attempt to tackle the irregular migration crisis as well as the humanitarian tragedy across the Channel.

On the diplomatic side, it is viewed as the latest constructive step in Franco-British cooperation, which has increased over recent years. On a technical level, it provides a proper legal framework for deportation and return procedures between the two countries for the first time since Brexit. It also benefits migrants residing in France with family ties to the UK who desire to join them, as the deal accelerates the process by reducing bureaucratic barriers, such as long waiting times and the need to meet with strict eligibility criteria, thus serving as a contingent pathway for those wishing to apply for this right.

However, questions remain regarding its efficacy in deterring smuggling gangs and human traffickers, as well as its real-life impact. It appears that these will be answered throughout the deal’s implementation, especially once it extends beyond the pilot phase.