Nineteen migrants were deported to France this week as part of the UK’s controversial “one in, one out” returns deal, a policy that has sparked sharp debate on both sides of the Channel. The removals, which took place on two flights—including one on Thursday, October 9, 2025—bring the total number of migrants sent back to France under the agreement to 26 since its launch in August, according to BBC and the UK Home Office.
The “one in, one out” scheme, formalized during the 37th Franco-British summit in London on July 10, 2025, was presented by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron as a way to stem the tide of unauthorized Channel crossings. Under the deal, for every migrant returned to France after attempting to reach the UK by small boat, another person selected in France is granted a visa to enter the UK. The UK has accepted 18 migrants from France in return, as reported by the Daily Mail.
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood described the recent removals as evidence that the government is “ramping up” efforts to deter migrants from making the dangerous journey. “We must put an end to these dangerous crossings which put lives at risk and money in the pockets of criminal gangs,” Mahmood said, as quoted by BBC. She added, “With flights to France now under way and ramping up, we are sending out a clear message: if you come here illegally, you face being detained and removed, so think twice before making that journey.”
The Home Office confirmed that the latest deportation flight, which took place Thursday, was originally bound for Eastern Europe but was diverted to France to offload nine people. Another group of ten had been sent back the previous week. These flights follow an earlier removal of seven migrants in September, marking the start of the agreement’s implementation.
Despite these efforts, the scale of Channel crossings remains daunting. According to Home Office figures cited by the Daily Mail, more than 10,000 migrants have arrived in the UK by small boat since the scheme’s launch on August 6, 2025. On a single day—Wednesday, October 8—1,075 people made the crossing, the third-highest daily figure this year. In total, more than 33,500 have crossed since the start of 2025, and the cumulative number since Labour took power now stands at 58,718.
French authorities, meanwhile, report having prevented over 17,600 attempted crossings this year. But the peril persists. Last month, a single vessel carried a record 125 migrants across the Channel, and people traffickers have begun deploying what officials describe as “mega dinghies,” further increasing the risks for those attempting the journey.
The government’s approach has not gone unchallenged. Critics, including advocacy groups and opposition politicians, argue that the “one in, one out” deal reduces asylum seekers to mere numbers in a political exchange, undermining the principles of international refugee law. In a joint statement published in Le Monde, British and French organizations—including Statewatch—denounced the agreement as “absurd and dangerous,” asserting that it “reduces human journeys to an accounting operation.”
The statement contends that the deal “transforms the right to asylum into a bargaining chip, reinforces the externalization of borders and tramples on the very essence of the Geneva Convention relating to the status of refugees.” It also criticizes the conditional nature of protection under the scheme, noting that the right to seek asylum is now dependent on the deportation of another person who may also be in need of protection. “This absurd logic transforms a fundamental right into a crime and the duty of protection into police management,” the statement reads.
Legal and practical hurdles further complicate the scheme’s operation. Eligibility criteria for entry to the UK under the agreement are described by critics as “inapplicable” for many migrants, with requirements such as prior legal residency in the UK for six consecutive months within the last five years. These hurdles, coupled with the administrative burden and lack of guaranteed protection in France, leave many migrants in limbo. Unaccompanied minors and stateless persons are notably excluded from the scheme, heightening their vulnerability.
The agreement’s critics also highlight the interplay with the European Union’s Dublin Regulation, which requires asylum seekers to apply for protection in the first EU country where their fingerprints are taken. This, they argue, traps many in countries with poor reception conditions and limited prospects, with the UK often seen as a last hope—an avenue now further restricted by the new deal.
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp was blunt in his assessment, telling the Daily Mail: “Labour is swindling the British public. This is just a massive con. Since the deal became operational over 10,000 illegal immigrants have crossed the Channel and Labour have removed a mere 26. This will obviously not deter anyone.” Philp called for the UK to leave the European Convention on Human Rights to enable faster deportations.
For their part, government officials maintain that the new approach is a marked improvement over previous efforts. Mahmood was quick to contrast the current policy with the Conservative government’s Rwanda scheme, which she said “took years and cost hundreds of millions of pounds, and failed to forcefully remove a single person.” She emphasized, “In a matter of weeks, we’ve returned 26 through our historic agreement with France.”
Yet even supporters acknowledge the slow pace of removals. The scheme has been mired in legal challenges and, at full capacity, is expected to remove only around 50 migrants a week. The Home Office has released images of migrants boarding charter flights for France, the first time such flights have been used under the scheme.
The policy’s impact on the ground remains to be seen. While ministers hope that the threat of swift removal will deter would-be migrants and “smash the gangs” that profit from trafficking, the continued high numbers of arrivals suggest that desperation and dangerous journeys persist. As a woman and two children tragically lost their lives in the Channel just weeks ago, the human cost of these policies is never far from view.
As the UK and France press ahead with their coordinated efforts—and as a new joint action plan on irregular migration is agreed with Germany and other European partners—the debate over the “one in, one out” deal is unlikely to subside. For now, the Channel remains a perilous frontier, and the search for a humane and effective solution continues.