UK Channel crossings: What is a safe and legal route?

Since records began in 2018, over 170,000 people have crossed the English Channel in small boats to seek asylum in the UK, with more than 20,000 making the journey this year alone — and dozens losing their lives in the process.

Over the years, successive UK governments have tried various strategies — including return agreements, tighter law enforcement, deportation schemes, and dismantling smuggling networks — to stop this dangerous practice. The latest initiative is a “one in, one out” pilot agreement with France, where the UK accepts some asylum seekers with strong claims while returning an equal number to France.

Campaigners, academics, and support groups argue that creating safe and legal routes is the only effective way to reduce demand for perilous Channel crossings. Since people have no authorised way to enter the UK and claim asylum, they turn to smugglers and dangerous boats instead.

What are safe and legal routes?

These are officially sanctioned pathways that allow people to enter the UK to claim asylum without needing a visa. According to the 1951 Refugee Convention, everyone has the right to claim asylum, but UK law requires that they be physically present in the UK to do so.

While crossing the Channel irregularly is considered illegal under UK law, the Refugee Convention specifies that refugees should not be penalised for how they arrive.

Does the UK offer safe and legal routes?

The UK has provided some safe and legal pathways in recent years, but these are highly limited and targeted at specific groups.

Two schemes for Afghans were launched in January 2022, after Kabul fell to the Taliban, and around 34,000 Afghans have been resettled through them. These programmes focused on individuals who helped UK efforts in Afghanistan and vulnerable groups such as women, girls, and minorities. Both schemes are now closed.

Other programmes have supported Ukrainians and Hongkongers. Since March 2022, about 217,000 Ukrainians have come to the UK under schemes like Homes for Ukraine, and since January 2021, approximately 179,000 Hongkongers with British National (Overseas) status and their dependents have relocated.

There’s also a family reunion route, allowing those already granted protection in the UK to bring close relatives. However, this route does not confer independent refugee status on the newcomers.

Since March 2021, the UK has worked with the UNHCR to resettle particularly vulnerable individuals directly from conflict zones, mainly in the Middle East and North Africa — but this has brought just 3,798 people to the UK so far, underscoring its very limited scope.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has said the new pilot deal with France will only apply to those who haven’t attempted to enter the UK illegally and who have a strong asylum claim — further narrowing eligibility for these “safe and legal” routes.

Currently, many of those crossing the Channel — including Afghans, Eritreans, Syrians, Iranians, and Sudanese — have no access to safe pathways, even though 68% of them are ultimately granted protection after claiming asylum.

The UK has not created specific humanitarian protections for people fleeing crises in Gaza, Sudan, or the Democratic Republic of Congo. In practice, for most asylum seekers, it remains impossible to reach the UK through safe and legal means.

Tackling the smugglers

In January 2025, the Refugee Council called for a new safe and legal route — through a limited number of refugee visas — to help stop deaths in the Channel.

Since 2018, at least 147 people have died attempting the crossing, with 2024 marking the deadliest year for child migrant deaths.

The UK government’s current strategy focuses on “smashing the gangs” behind the crossings. But evidence shows that cracking down on smugglers only pushes them to adapt, often putting migrants at even greater risk by using longer routes or overcrowding boats.

By contrast, expanding safe and legal pathways would reduce reliance on smugglers and offer a humane, compassionate refugee system in line with the UK’s international obligations. Even if the gangs were dismantled, the need for protection for those fleeing war zones would remain — highlighting the importance of creating accessible, lawful routes to safety.