UK Seeks “One In, One Out” Migration Deals with Germany, Netherlands & Belgium

The United Kingdom government is pushing to establish new bilateral “one in, one out” migration agreements with Germany, The Netherlands and Belgium, aimed at controlling irregular crossings of the English Channel. According to the report, the UK would return migrants who crossed via those countries if proof exists they passed through them — and in exchange, it would accept an equal number of recognised asylum seekers from those countries. 

Background:
The initiative builds on an existing deal with France under the so-called Calais Group, established in 2022. The UK says its point is to “scale up” cooperation with additional European partners. 

So far, the UK has only returned 42 migrants to France and taken in 23 from France — modest numbers compared to the over 36,000 Channel crossings recorded in the year to date. 

What it means & why it matters:

• This proposal signals that the UK is aiming for more active, reciprocal migration deals within Europe rather than handling irregular crossings unilaterally.

• It raises questions about burden-sharing: the UK sees itself willing to accept asylum seekers from partner countries, but only in exchange for deporting irregular arrivals who transited via those countries.

• For Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium this could mean additional legal asylum intake from the UK, but also greater responsibility to track migrants who later travel onward.

• It may affect EU-UK relations and how the UK negotiates migration outside of the EU frameworks — especially after Brexit.

• For job seekers or migrants, this may translate into stricter scrutiny of transit routes and more emphasis on legal pathways of migration into the UK.

Potential impacts for employment/immigration-services clients (e.g., those working with consultancies such as Think Europe Services):

• Greater importance of documenting travel/entry history: if the UK is to return someone because they passed through Germany/Netherlands/Belgium, then proof of route may matter.

• Increased demand for legal “safe and legal pathways” as opposed to irregular migration routes.

• Possibly more opportunities for recognised asylum seekers being transferred from the UK under these deals — though exact numbers and criteria are unclear.

• Migration consultancy firms may need to update clients on shifting bilateral deals and how those affect eligibility, transit risk, documentation and timing.

Challenges & unanswered questions:

• How will “proof” of passing through a country be determined and verified?

• What criteria will partner countries use to select asylum seekers to send to the UK?

• Will this create unintended incentives for migrants to avoid certain transit countries?

• How will this interact with EU laws on asylum, rights of transit, and onward movement within Europe?

• What will be the cost and administrative burden on the partner countries and on the UK?

• Are human-rights or legal safeguards in place to protect asylum seekers from forced return without due process?

Conclusion:
The UK’s push for “one in, one out” migration deals with Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium marks a shift in European migration policy — from primarily reacting to arrivals, to building more structured bilateral cooperation. For migration service providers and prospective migrants it underscores the increasing significance of legal transit routes, documentation of travel history, and the alignment of migration options with formal accords rather than informal or irregular pathways.