France’s 2025 census has ignited a predictable but exhausting row. The controversy centres on a seemingly innocuous question: ‘Where were your parents born?’ Cue outrage from the French left, who have called for a boycott of the question, declaring it racist and a dangerous gateway to discrimination.
The fact is that many on the left in France don’t want any data on immigration
The government has for the first time included the question in this year’s national census. Left wing NGOs and unions say that ‘recording this information is a step toward potential inequality of treatment by the state’ and that ‘no public policy justifies the collection of our parents’ immigrant origins in individual census forms – this question presents many dangers.’
This reaction from the left is as revealing as it is entirely misplaced. In a country where until now it has been illegal to compile statistics on ethnicity, the debate has exposed a national hypocrisy: how it is possible to address inequality, if society is too squeamish to even gather the data needed to identify it? How is it possible that France has almost no statistics whatsoever on the ethnicity of its population?
At the heart of this debate lies a uniquely French paradox. The Republic prides itself on being colour-blind, treating everyone equally, regardless of origin, race, or religion. Enshrined in the 1958 Constitution, this principle has been interpreted to mean that collecting ethnic or racial data is strictement interdit. Yet the same Republic is struggling to address glaring inequalities, from housing and employment to education. The absence until now of any statistics leaves policymakers navigating completely in the dark. At present one can only guess at the number of immigrants in the country.
The question in the 2025 census on parental birthplace seems sensible enough. In fact it’s well overdue. Finally, the government seems to be waking up. According to INSEE, France’s national statistics bureau, the data will help France to understand generational mobility, identifying whether the children of immigrants have equitable access to opportunities.
Yet the left is arguing vociferously that including the question in the census opens the door to stigmatisation and abuse. The Ligue des droits de l’Homme and other left-wing NGO’s and unions have painted the measure as a prelude to far-right policies, with dystopian ethnic tracking.
Needless to say, this reaction from the left completely misses the point. First, the question is optional. Those unwilling to answer are free to not to do so, without consequence. Second, the data is anonymised and used only for statistical purposes, a point INSEE has repeatedly stressed.
But the most significant flaw in the left’s argument is their failure to recognise that transparency is the foundation of equality and dealing with the problems that immigrants are facing. How can a country tackle the problems of immigration if it can’t even identify how many immigrants there are in the country, and where and how, they live?
The fact is that many on the left in France don’t want any data on immigration. Perhaps it’s because if the true numbers were known, it would bring up all sorts of awkward questions.
Meanwhile, other countries have long since embraced the value of demographic data. The UK and the US, for instance, routinely include questions about ethnicity and parental origins in their censuses. France’s refusal to follow suit isn’t an act of moral superiority; it’s an abdication of responsibility.
France’s 2025 census debate is a microcosm of the country’s identity crisis. The left’s boycott of the census is a misguided attempt to preserve an ideal of equality that has completely failed to reflect reality.
Data is not the enemy. On the contrary, it is the tool that allows societies to address problems. France must have the courage to face uncomfortable truths about its immigrant population. That begins with asking the right questions – even when the answers may undermine years of immigration policy and raise legitimate public policy questions.
Comments