Why did the ‘one in, one out’ migrant prefer Britain to France?

Sometimes a narrative about a hapless government can develop that means even the most apparently trivial of news stories gains much greater traction for being set in the context of a wider pattern of failure, misjudgement and setbacks.

So it is with the remarkable story of an Iranian migrant who came to Britain illegally on a boat, made his claim for asylum, had it rejected, was returned to France and then simply made the journey again – making a mockery of the “one in, one out” returns agreement with France.

It happened just as the number of such Channel crossings exceeded the total number for the whole of 2024. The farcical element thus highlighted a wider political challenge connected to relatively high volumes of immigration generally, and about border control, while public concern about migrant hotels, in particular, continues…

Sir Keir Starmer said on Thursday that Britain will remove him again “very, very swiftly” and he will be “fast-tracked back out of the country, because we obviously have his details”.

However, a more fundamental issue is the way that the deal – full title: Agreement Between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the French Republic on the Prevention of Dangerous Journeys – was vastly oversold by the prime minister. He declared it to be a “breakthrough moment” that would “turn the tables” on the people smugglers. In reality, some 42 individuals have been sent back at the last count, 16 on the most recent flight. That stands against the total this year so far of 36,734 small boat entries.

It has had some high-profile successes, and international cooperation, especially with France, Belgium and Germany is building. However, like the war on drugs and an older tradition of smuggling contraband, it is a constant struggle and a cat and mouse game played with great sophistication by the criminals.

It seems they are not doing as much as they have previously promised. A much more promising policy was that the French would intercept and puncture boats as they set off on their journeys, but it seems that the dangers to all concerned in such an active approach has meant a rethink, backing away from a commitment to intervene more forcefully at sea. Political instability in France and the loss of a previously helpful interior minister hasn’t helped.

There was a more robust returns regime under the Dublin Accords, but the real damage to UK border control came with loss of access to Eurodac, the EU’s migrant fingerprint records. Pre-Brexit, the British could identify whether migrants had previously made a claim for asylum, and if it had failed and thus be eligible for return or deportation. Now that is no longer possible, so some would-be refugees who’ve been turned down in EU nations make the journey to the UK to make another try.

He claims he is a victim of modern slavery at the hands of smugglers in northern France.

He told The Guardian: “If I had felt that France was safe for me I would never have returned to the UK. 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 UK from France the first time.”

Iranians are among the largest groups attempting the hazardous Channel crossing. Iran is obviously a hostile environment for dissidents, LGBT+ and women, with a struggling economy and oppressive society. There is a well-established community of Iranians in Britain, dating back to the fall of the Shah and the establishment of the Iranian Republic in 1979.

Some may be more like economic migrants than classic refugees fleeing torture. But like all such irregular migrants, they may be eligible for assistance and access to the NHS and can attempt to claim asylum for family members. As with many others, the English language is usually an important “pull” factor.

It isn’t helping. But if the migrant hotels were closed more rapidly than planned (the present deadline of the end of the current parliament won’t satisfy public opinion), the backlog of claims cleared and the number of arrivals cut, the issue might be less salient. A healthy economy and rising living standards would help the government even more.

At present, Reform UK is blaming immigration for poor public services, house prices and unemployment while the Greens are attracting the “refugees welcome” vote.