SHARE
COPY LINK
For members

EDUCATION

Explained: Why is school uniform controversial in France?

France's education minister has announced that he wants to 'experiment' with imposing a uniform in schools - but this is one topic guaranteed to raise controversy.

Explained: Why is school uniform controversial in France?
School uniform is common in France's overseas territory of Martinique, but is more unusual in mainland France. Photo by ERIC FEFERBERG / AFP

Newly-appointed education minister Gabriel Attal has announced that he wants to create a pilot scheme to test out requiring school pupils in France to wear a uniform.

Unlike in many countries where school uniforms are normal practice – for example in the UK 90 percent of schools require a uniform – in France uniform requirements are rare and the topic itself is controversial.

Announcing the trial, Attal was notably restrained, saying that he did not think that uniforms were a “miracle solution” but that the idea should be tested.

“I am very much in favour of a trial so that it can advance the debate. The best way to get an idea is to test things out in schools,” he told radio station RTL.

Current rules

At present it is up to the individual school to decide whether their pupils should wear a uniform, there is no nationwide policy on it.

The vast majority of public schools don’t have a uniform requirement – but there are two exceptions to this. In the French overseas territories of Guadeloupe and Martinique (both in the Caribbean) uniforms are widely worn.

In mainland France, the schools that have a uniform requirement tend to be private schools, religious schools or military schools. There are some exceptions to this, however, for example several boarding schools set up by the government to help under-achieving pupils have a uniform.

History

Politicians often talk about ‘bringing back’ and uniform or ‘returning’ to the tradition of a uniform, but in fact France has never had a widespread policy of school uniforms.

Until the 19th Century, most schools in France were private or run by the Catholic Church.

It was under Napoleon’s rule that lycées were set up and the baccalaureat end-of-school exam was introduced – at this stage lycées were usually boarding schools with a military ethos – and many of them had uniforms.

Theoretically open to a much broader group of pupils than before (and when we say pupils, we mean boys – girls wouldn’t get widespread educational opportunities for another 50 years) it was noted at the time that the cost of the uniform proved a barrier to potential lycée pupils from lower-income families.

The first free schools were set up under the ministry of Jules Ferry in the 1880s, whose aim was to break the stranglehold that the Catholic church retained on education. 

He set up free primary schools and made education compulsory between the ages of six and 13, extended to 14 in 1936.

Uniform was not compulsory in most of these new public schools, with the main deciding factor being that uniform expenses would deter parents from sending their children.

Some pre-existing schools kept their uniforms, however, but many decided to drop them in the 1960s, especially after the widespread student protests of 1968. 

Up until the 1970s pupils in primary schools often wore smocks (blouses in French) to protect their clothes while at school, but in most cases these were not compulsory.

Recent history 

In recent years, the push to introduce a school uniform has often come from politicians on the right or centre-right, sometimes in the context of laïcité.

Although the state does not have a uniform policy, it does impose rules on what pupils (and staff) cannot wear in schools. Under a law introduced in 2004, pupils and staff in French schools are explicitly forbidden from “the wearing of conspicuous religious symbols or garb” in schools. Although it applies to all religious symbols, the biggest impact has been on Muslim girls.

From September 4th, 2023, this has been expanded to include a ban on the abaya – the long, loose robe or dress commonly worn in the Middle East and parts of Africa. The rationale for this is also laïcité – it is said that some female Muslim pupils are wearing the abaya to show their faith, since they are banned from wearing the hijab.

Extreme right commentator and failed presidential candidate Eric Zemmour said that he is in favour of a uniform “to avoid Islamic provocations in schools”.

A petition calling for the return of uniforms for reasons of secularism has been widely circulated on far-right social media accounts.

But it’s worth noting that this is not a straightforward left v right issue – some politicians on the centre and left also support the introduction of a uniform.

Over the summer Brigitte Macron also said she was in favour of a uniform – responding to a question at a newspaper Q&A session: “I wore a uniform as a pupil: 15 years of dark blue short skirt, dark blue jumper. And I thought it was fine,” she said, responding to a question from a 14-year-old schoolgirl.

“It erases differences, it saves time. It’s time-consuming to choose what to wear in the morning, and costs money to buy brands. So I’m in favour of school uniforms, but if it’s a simple outfit – and not too drab.”

Who says what?

In a broad overview, the people in favour of a school uniform say that it promotes a collective identity, helps to enforce secularism, simplifies the morning routine for parents and children and promotes equality by requiring everyone – rich or poor – to dress the same.

Those opposed to uniforms cite the extra cost to parents and say that it prevents pupils from developing and expressing their own identities. They say there is no evidence that uniforms help to promote equality or prevent bullying, and add that they can make children vulnerable to attack from pupils at rival schools.

Attal said that details of the pilot scheme will be released “in the autumn”, while several regional representatives have offered to run local trials in their area.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

ELECTIONS

Will Macron resign in case of a French election disaster?

The polling is not looking good for president Emmanuel Macron's party in the snap elections that he called just two weeks ago. So will he resign if it all goes wrong?

Will Macron resign in case of a French election disaster?

On Sunday, June 9th, the French president stunned Europe when he called snap parliamentary elections in France, in the wake of humiliating results for his centrist group in the European elections.

The French president has the power to dissolve parliament and call fresh elections – but this power is rarely used and in recent decades French parliaments have run on fixed terms. Very few people predicted Macron’s move.

But polling for the fresh elections (held over two rounds on June 30th and July 7th) is looking very bad for the president’s centrist Renaissance party – currently trailing third behind Marine Le Pen’s far-right Rassemblement National and the combined leftist group Nouveau Front Populaire.

Listen to the team from The Local discussing all the election latest in the new episode of the Talking France podcast. Download here or listen on the link below

The election was a gamble for Macron – but if his gamble fails will he resign?

What does the law and the constitution say?

Legally, Macron does not need to resign. In France the presidential and the parliamentary elections are separate – Macron himself was re-elected in 2022 with a five-year mandate (until May 2027).

His party failing to gain a parliamentary majority does not change that – in fact the centrists failed to gain a overall majority in the 2022 parliamentary elections too (although they remained the largest party). Since then, the government has limped on, managing to pass some legislation by using constitutional powers.

The constitution also offers no compulsion or even a suggestion that the president should resign if he fails to form a government.

In fact the current constitution (France has had five) gives a significant amount of power to the president at the expense of parliament – the president has the power to dissolve parliament (as Macron has demonstrated), to set policy on areas including defence and diplomacy and to bypass parliament entirely and force through legislation (through the tool known as Article 49.3). 

In fact there are only three reasons in the constitution that a president would finish their term of office early; resigning, dying in office or being the subject of impeachment proceedings.

Since 1958, only one president has resigned – Charles de Gaulle quit in 1969 after the failure of a referendum that he had backed. He died 18 months later, at the age of 79.  

OK, but is he likely to resign?

He says not. In an open letter to the French people published over the weekend, Macron wrote: “You can trust me to act until May 2027 as your president, protector at every moment of our republic, our values, respectful of pluralism and your choices, at your service and that of the nation.”

He insisted that the coming vote was “neither a presidential election, nor a vote of confidence in the president of the republic” but a response to “a single question: who should govern France?”

So it looks likely that Macron will stay put.

And he wouldn’t be the first French president to continue in office despite his party having failed to win a parliamentary majority – presidents François Mitterand and Jacques Chirac both served part of their term in office in a ‘cohabitation‘ – the term for when the president is forced to appoint an opposition politician as prime minister.

But should he resign?

The choice to call the snap elections was Macron’s decision, it seems he took the decision after discussing it just a few close advisers and it surprised and/or infuriated even senior people in his own party.

If the poll leads to political chaos then, many will blame Macron personally and there will be many people calling for his resignation (although that’s hardly new – Macron démission has been a regular cry from political opponents over the last seven years as he enacted policies that they didn’t like).

Regardless of the morality of dealing with the fallout of your own errors, there is also the practicality – if current polling is to be believed, none of the parties are set to achieve an overall majority and the likely result with be an extremely protracted and messy stalemate with unstable governments, fragile coalitions and caretaker prime ministers. It might make sense to have some stability at the top, even if that figure is extremely personally unpopular.

He may leave the country immediately after the result of the second round, however. Washington is hosting a NATO summit on July 9th-11th and a French president would normally attend that as a representative of a key NATO member. 

You can follow all the latest election news HERE or sign up to receive by email our bi-weekly election breakdown

SHOW COMMENTS