hendra-wijaya
The British government has confirmed that its pilot agreement with France to return some migrants who cross the English Channel in small boats has been discontinued. The arrangement, widely referred to as the "one in, one out" scheme, permitted the UK to send back certain small boat arrivals while accepting an equivalent number of people from France deemed to have a legitimate claim to enter Britain. The decision marks the end of a policy that ministers had once hoped would serve as a deterrent to people considering the dangerous sea crossing.
Under the scheme, which had been running for just over a year, only about 1,500 people were removed to France. The BBC understands that the government would have preferred to keep the arrangement running but concluded that it had failed to reach the scale required to be effective. The limited numbers involved undermined the programme's central premise, which was to demonstrate that arriving in the UK without permission would not automatically lead to a settled outcome.
A Home Office spokesperson said the pilot was no longer processing new cases. However, the spokesperson added that removal flights would continue in the coming weeks to send small boat migrants back from the UK. The government, the spokesperson said, would use the "lessons learned" from the pilot to accelerate efforts to remove those with no right to remain. This suggests ministers intend to pursue a broader removals strategy even as the flagship reciprocal arrangement with Paris winds down.
The French Interior Ministry confirmed that discussions with the British side about the terms of exiting the agreement were under way. The phrasing indicates that the two countries are still negotiating the practical and legal details of how the pilot will be wound up, even though its operational life has effectively ended. Both governments have consistently framed their cooperation on Channel crossings as essential, and neither has suggested that wider joint efforts will cease.
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood told MPs earlier this month that the scheme had "not been without its challenges." She acknowledged that the numbers involved remained relatively small, and that scaling up removals on a weekly basis into the French system had proved operationally difficult. Her comments pointed to a core problem: the mechanism was never able to process people at the volume that would have been necessary to make a meaningful impact on overall crossing figures or on the calculations of people-smuggling networks.
Mahmood also noted, however, that the United Nations and other agencies had reported that some migrants were choosing not to board small boats because they believed the scheme offered a chance of being accepted into the UK. That observation suggests the policy may have had some deterrent effect at the margins, even if it could not be sustained or expanded. Supporters of reciprocal return arrangements argue that such deals send a message that unauthorised arrivals will not be rewarded, while critics contend they are costly, slow and ethically fraught.
The costs of the pilot were considerable. According to the home secretary, the scheme cost £56,000 for every person returned to France. That figure is likely to intensify scrutiny of whether the arrangement represented value for money. For a programme that returned roughly 1,500 people over its lifetime, the expenditure raises questions about whether similar bilateral deals can ever be scaled affordably, particularly when each removal involves legal processes, escorts, documentation and diplomatic coordination.
Official statistics underline the scale of the challenge that the scheme was intended to address. Between 1 January and 27 September 2026, some 19,135 people crossed the English Channel by small boat from France. That figure was 42 percent lower than the same period in the previous year, when 32,188 people made the crossing. The Home Office spokesperson described the downward trend as "real progress," noting that numbers are significantly down on last year.
Annual data show how arrivals have fluctuated since small boat crossings became a prominent route into the UK. In 2018, just 299 arrivals were recorded. The figure rose to 1,843 in 2019, then jumped to 8,462 in 2020. Arrivals reached 28,526 in 2021 and peaked at 45,755 in 2022, before falling to 29,437 in 2023 and rising again to 36,816 in 2024. In 2025, the total stood at 41,472. So far in 2026, the count stands at 19,135 as of 27 September, the fifth-highest total for the years shown at the same point in the calendar.
Small boat arrivals have become the most common way for people to be detected entering the UK illegally since 2020. Nearly all of those who arrive by this route claim asylum, and under international law they are permitted to remain in the country while their applications are considered. Between July 2025 and June 2026, small boat arrivals accounted for 40 percent of all asylum applications. This dynamic helps explain why successive governments have struggled to design policies that both uphold legal obligations and reduce the incentive to make the crossing.
The profile of those arriving is diverse but concentrated among a handful of origin countries. Eritrea accounted for 18 percent of all arrivals between July 2025 and June 2026. The next largest groups came from Sudan, with 4,191 arrivals detected, Afghanistan with 4,042, Somalia with 3,901 and Iran with 3,657. These figures reflect the persistence of conflict, repression and instability in parts of East Africa, the Horn of Africa and South Asia, factors that push people to seek protection far from home.
The boats themselves have grown more crowded, adding to the dangers of the journey. Vessels arriving in the UK between 28 September 2025 and 27 September 2026 carried an average of 67 people, more than double the figure recorded in 2021. Experts say overcrowding makes crossings riskier, and the United Nations has estimated that at least 84 people died while attempting to cross the Channel in 2024. The human cost remains a central concern for rescue services, coastal communities and humanitarian organisations.
Small boat arrivals, however, represent only a fraction of overall migration to the UK. They amounted to about five percent of total immigration into the country between January 2025 and December 2025. Other unauthorised entry routes also persist. Between July 2025 and June 2026, another 4,712 people were detected entering the UK without permission by methods such as hiding in vehicles, travelling on ferries or arriving through airports. That figure was down 17 percent on the same period a year earlier.
There are also people who arrive legally on work or study visas and then overstay their permitted time. The total number of people living in the UK illegally after arriving through legal routes is not known, which complicates any attempt to measure the overall effectiveness of enforcement policy. The government has pledged to "smash the gangs" behind small boat crossings, arguing that targeting criminal networks is the most sustainable way to reduce the numbers making the journey.
Within the wider picture, the Home Office has also recorded cases of exploitation among those arriving by small boat. In figures covering January to December 2025, at least 2,335 people who arrived by this route were identified as potential victims of human trafficking or other forms of modern slavery. That finding underscores the vulnerability of people who place their lives in the hands of smuggling operations and the importance of protection mechanisms once they reach British shores.
The scrapping of the "one in, one out" pilot leaves the UK and France searching for alternative ways to manage cross-Channel migration. The government insists it will keep working with Paris and that removal flights will continue, while the French side has signalled that exit negotiations are ongoing. For now, the scheme stands as a cautionary example of how difficult it is to translate a politically attractive idea into an operation capable of handling large numbers of people, high costs and complex legal obligations.
Comments (0)