Voices: ‘Sensible’ or ‘Labour’s version of Rwanda’? Readers divided over one in, one out migration deal

As Sir Keir Starmer stood beside Emmanuel Macron to unveil a “groundbreaking” one in, one out migration deal, Independent readers were quick to react – and responses ranged from cautious hope to outright dismissal.

Some saw the deal as a long-overdue return to grown-up diplomacy after years of standoffs and political posturing.

Many welcomed the move away from the Conservatives’ costly Rwanda scheme, calling this new approach more pragmatic and rooted in cooperation. One reader praised Starmer for behaving like an “adult” on the world stage and for finally securing a deal that had eluded previous prime ministers.

But doubts loomed large. Some readers questioned whether a plan sending back just 50 migrants a week could ever match the scale of the challenge.

Several others argued the numbers simply didn’t add up, with hundreds still crossing each week, wondering whether this could become Labour’s version of Rwanda: expensive, ineffective and ultimately more symbolic than substantive.

Naturally, many blamed Brexit for dismantling systems that once helped manage asylum claims. But others remained unconvinced by closer ties with the EU.

There were calls for tougher deterrents, including offshore processing and biometric tracking, but also a reminder from some that, without tackling root causes or expanding legal routes, little would change.

Here’s what you had to say:

Positive, optimistic, and straight-talking

Macron will have made a lot of friends in the UK on this visit. He has been positive, optimistic and straight-talking, pulling no punches. We are now closer to France and Europe than we have been for many years, and the majority of the British people are in favour of that.

Small boat crossings? Something, at last, is being done. The Rwanda scheme, brought to you by the likes of Suella Braverman, was a waste of time and loads of money. Cooperation between neighbours is much more sensible. Let's see if it works, because the willingness is there.

RegCostello

Do you think the Starmer–Macron migration deal will help reduce small boat crossings? Share your views in the comments.

A deal, but not as we know it

Well, it’s a deal I suppose, but as they say, not as we know it.

There were far more important things discussed, and President Macron alluded to those at the press conference.

But, of course, the elephant in the room was always Brexit. Macron was too polite and direct to say so explicitly, but his view was clear. The whole project was and is a disaster.

If Brexit had not happened, then the small boats issue would not have risen on the British political agenda because the EU schemes we used to be members of no longer apply. Funny how the numbers mushroomed after 2018, eh?

Did Brexit not teach this country's politicians anything? Britain is just not that important on its own. For some reason, they still tread on eggshells because they still fear the people who inflicted this disaster on us. The public now has them rumbled. Time our politicians caught up. Brexit must be reversed.

49niner

Still embittered by Brexit

France must be bloody awful, as so many seem desperate to leave for Brexit Britain. Macron is still embittered to this day by the UK public having the temerity to vote to withdraw from the EU project.

He did raise one good point regarding the pull factor, but the chances of Starmer addressing this are zilch.

Noverngit1

A drop in the ocean

Many are quite rightly saying that a few hundred arrive per week – weather permitting – so 50 being returned to France per week is a drop in the ocean. This is very true.

However, between 80 and 100 per cent of applicants from Afghanistan, Turkey, Eritrea, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, South Sudan, and those considered to be stateless (to mention a few of the principal countries) are accepted as genuine refugees. This means the overall number of refugees in the UK won’t be noticeably different unless the UK changes its policy.

People also seem to forget that, no matter how bad many in the UK consider the conditions for refugees and those seeking asylum to be, for many of these people, it's like heaven on earth compared to where they came from.

No matter what Starmer and Macron come up with, it's not likely to have much effect. There would need to be a concerted effort by those countries desperate to reduce the number of migrants they’re being forced to deal with, and the countries causing the non-stop flow of those desperate to get out.

Maybe those countries – Europe taking the brunt of this – need to spend more energy and money tackling the root cause instead of throwing money at the result. Cutting foreign aid won’t have helped.

Economic migrants, or anyone who isn't prepared to reveal who he/she is, should be returned to where they came from or, if necessary, to a third country after being biometrically registered so no return with a new name is possible. This would mean European countries would have to co-operate, which would probably be the first challenge!

Ambigirls

Wrong sort of Brexit

Macron is correct, we were sold a lie in 2016. But not just over migrants – over a long list of other broken promises and expectations.

Not to be deterred, the likes of Farage have an excuse: evidently, it was the wrong sort of Brexit!

On the BBC News tonight, Badenoch claimed the latest deal was not as good as the Rwanda scheme. The Rwanda scheme promised that 200 migrants would be returned in one year. Starmer's deal starts at 50 a week. OK, not a big number, but 50 a week is 2,600 a year.

tommy2tops

A different level to Starmer

I think Macron is being eminently reasonable. He is on a different level to Starmer.

You can't expect the French to bend over backwards to prevent migrants from departing their shores.

Everyone has the right to claim asylum.

Britain, as usual, is trying to claim exceptionalism.

Cyclone8

Turning the corner on dinghy crossings

A few more deals with Germany, Spain, Italy, etc, and we may be turning the corner on dinghy crossings. The ones we take can work and don’t need to stay in hotels.

Tories can’t complain. Their Rwanda scheme, costing hundreds of millions, was meant to deal with six people per week.

JustOneMoreThing

Safe route

Sensible deal, particularly the safe route opening on the French side.

The Tories complain it’s only 50 a week, ignoring their Rwanda deal only allowed 300 in an entire year! Reform is panicking and hoping this doesn’t work – if it does, why vote for them?

It certainly won’t be because they are the anti-establishment party, with the ranks filling with ex-Tory MPs!

Hammerhead72

More than the last three PMs achieved

Despite the predictable stream of negativity about the impact of this, it is still one deal more than any of Starmer's three predecessors reached.

The pilot scheme may be able to return several thousand people per year, which is more than the Rwanda scheme would have managed.

For all the Tory outrage about its abolition, this would only ever have removed a few hundred people a year.

Tanaquil2

Potential

A one in, one out policy has the potential to work. But only if every single person who tries to enter the UK by crossing the Channel in boats is returned to France.

If this were to be done, they would very soon stop even trying, because of the cast-iron certainty that they will be returned to France, meaning that the money they are paying to the organised criminals for these boats is being wasted.

This will also benefit France, as it will remove the pull factor that is drawing them to France solely to access the UK.

Mark

Remove the financial incentives

The only thing that will make these crossings less attractive is removing financial incentives and/or processing applications in a third country.

MedicineDog

An adult in the room

Isn't it amazing what can be achieved by an adult PM speaking to the French President? Starting with Cameron through May, Johnson, Truss, particularly, and a little thaw with Sunak, there have been fifteen years of antagonism while expecting – no, demanding – cooperation. Now we have an adult PM, and there are results.

Of course, there's room for improvement, but it's a start. Joining the European Union would improve things no end, as most now recognise.

rEUjoin

Nothing has been achieved

Just what exactly has been achieved? The boats will still keep on coming.

Rejoin the EU – why? The so-called economic powerhouse countries, Germany and Franc,e are performing worse than ourselves. Anything else is just tinkering.

Noverngit1

Some of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.

Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up.

Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here.