Can You Tick English and British on the Census?
How Can Someone Already Choose English and Still Want the Census Changed?
Yes. In the 2021 census in England and Wales, people could select both English and British when answering the question about national identity. The November 2026 proposal to recognise descriptions such as Black English and Asian English concerns how the census presents ethnicity. Those two facts fit together because the form asks two questions.
Picture someone born in Birmingham who describes herself as Black, English and British. Those words do different work for her. One may connect her to family and community, another to the place she grew up, and another to a wider country to which she feels she belongs. A form has to turn that combination into information that can be counted. The argument is about what happens in that conversion.
What Did the National Identity Question Ask?
The 2021 question asked, “How would you describe your national identity?” Respondents could select all the options that applied. In England the choices included English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish and British, with space to supply another identity. A respondent who identified as both English and British could mark both. Someone who identified with neither could use the space provided.
National identity in this context is self-described. It is about the country or countries with which a person feels a connection. Someone can hold a British passport, have been born abroad and identify strongly with both Britain and the country where they were born. A census analyst would need different questions to study citizenship, place of birth and the person’s sense of belonging.
The order in which options appear is worth noticing. Forms for England and Wales had differences in presentation, including which identity appeared first. That is one reason to name the jurisdiction when comparing forms. Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own census arrangements. A screenshot from one nation cannot settle a disagreement about the wording respondents saw elsewhere.
What Did the Ethnic Group Question Ask?
A separate question asked, “What is your ethnic group?” Respondents chose one section and then the description that best fitted within it, with write-in options available. The structure organised detailed responses into broader groups. Under some headings the printed language included British. The White category’s combined option explicitly listed English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or British. People noticed that the prominent labels available elsewhere did not present Englishness in the same way.
Ethnic group in official statistics is self-defined and can encompass culture, ancestry, family background, identity or some combination. The census has to present options recognisable enough to answer and consistent enough to tabulate. Neither aim is trivial. A person looking at the form encounters an immediate question about how they describe themselves. A researcher receives a classification shaped by thousands or millions of individual choices.
People of mixed or multiple ethnic backgrounds could choose the relevant section or write a description. An ethnic group classification containing one recorded category for each person therefore should not be read as a claim that people possess only one ancestry or cultural association. It tells us how answers to a specific question were collected and coded.
Where Is the Gap if You Can Use Both Questions?
Return to the hypothetical Birmingham resident. She can tick English and British under national identity. She can select a Black ethnic group in the separate question. Given a suitably detailed table, an analyst can count people who supplied that combination. That is valuable. It still leaves open whether she was explicitly offered Black English as a description of her ethnicity.
An analyst assembling a cross-tabulation and a respondent looking for words on a screen are doing different things. The cross-tabulation asks how answers to two separate questions intersect. A named option allows someone to recognise and select a combined description directly. It also makes that possibility visible to everybody else filling in the same form. This difference in recognition is one reason the debate persists even when the statistical possibility of counting broad combinations already exists.
There is a further complication. The Birmingham resident might use several national identities and a different description of ethnicity from somebody else who ticks exactly the same boxes. Inferring that both would choose Black English if offered the option requires an assumption about their preferences. Asking them the question would produce evidence about that preference. Existing responses do not retrospectively supply it.
What Are MPs Proposing?
In November 2026 MPs called for census ethnicity options to accommodate descriptions including Black English and Asian English. The proposal has entered a wider political debate about who can call themselves English. The immediate administrative question is narrower. Which words should appear, in which part of a future form, and how should answers be classified?
Public support from a politician is different from a final approved questionnaire. A change would require detailed choices about wording and testing. Would a new tick box sit alongside an existing option, replace one, or appear as a follow-up? Would national labels be combined with broad ethnic group headings or offered at a more detailed level? A headline reporting political support cannot settle those design decisions.
Wording also needs to work for people who have no settled preference between labels and those who care deeply about the difference. Anyone reading quickly ought to understand where to answer. A respondent should not have to infer the designers’ political intentions from the position of a box. Testing can reveal unexpected interpretations long before they become problems in the national data.
Why Isn't a Write-In Box Enough for Everyone?
A write-in field can accommodate a description that statisticians did not anticipate. It is especially valuable to people whose identity is missing from a printed list. But typing an answer requires more effort than ticking an available box. It can also require a respondent to choose an “other” category despite feeling that they belong squarely within a named group.
Two people with the same preference might therefore complete the form differently. One takes the time to write their usual description. The other selects the nearest available option and moves on. Add a named choice at the next census and a rise in people selecting it could reflect both a change in identity and a change in how easy it is to express an existing identity.
That matters when interpreting trends. Imagine a category receiving many more selections after a redesign. It would be tempting to conclude that a community had grown by the difference between the two counts. Before doing so, an analyst would examine the earlier write-ins, changes to surrounding options and tests of how people understand the new wording. A better questionnaire can create a break in a statistical series precisely because it measures something more clearly.
Why Does the Same Tick Box Matter Beyond Politics?
Imagine a local organisation planning an oral-history project about what it means to grow up English in a particular town. Census data might help describe the community, but the organisation would need to define who it meant to include. Should someone who selected both English and British count? What about someone who selected British and described themselves as Black English in a write-in field elsewhere? A single statistic cannot resolve a question the researcher has yet to specify.
The design matters just as much for long-running comparisons. If the next form adds an option, a researcher may choose to combine several categories to preserve comparability over time. That can produce a sound trend while making the newly recognised identity disappear again from the published chart. Another researcher might preserve the detail and start a new series. Both decisions can be reasonable provided readers are told what has been counted.
People sometimes assume a census aims to establish the correct name for every identity. Its more modest and more difficult task is to produce information people can supply about themselves and others can interpret reliably. The November debate draws attention to an unusual moment when the experience of filling in the form and the consequences of analysing it can be discussed before the next round of decisions is made.
In particular, a count published for England and Wales should retain that geographical label when quoted. Changing it to Britain silently changes the population the figure seems to describe.
Why Ask About Ethnicity and National Identity Separately?
Keeping both questions allows researchers to examine diversity within a shared identity. English respondents can be studied across many ethnic backgrounds. Members of the same ethnic group can describe different national affiliations. Local authorities, researchers and communities can examine patterns without assuming that one answer dictates the other.
Care is still needed with the denominator. A table showing people who chose English only excludes someone who chose both English and British. A table showing anyone who selected English includes them. Both tables can be accurate and yet give different impressions of how many people feel English. Before comparing political claims, look for words such as “only”, “also” and “at least one”. They can change the meaning of an entire percentage.
The simplest answer to the current debate is to imagine completing the form twice, once for each question. In the national identity box, English and British were already compatible answers. The proposed change asks what someone should see when they turn to ethnicity. Whether the country adopts it will depend in part on how well a new form captures what people mean when they describe themselves in their own words.
Sources
National identity, England and Wales - Office for National Statistics — The national identity question and published results.
Ethnic group, England and Wales - Office for National Statistics — The classification and collection of ethnic group data.
'Black English' and 'Asian English' should be census options, MPs say — The November proposal for new ethnicity options.
Next Reads
The history of englands constitutional fight from magna carta to modern britain — Trace the institutions that shaped England’s political identity.
Uk immigration stats reveal the quiet driver extensions now swamp new entries — See why categories matter when interpreting a different set of UK statistics.
How ageing populations will reshape the world over the next 25 years — Explore how population measures shape public debate.
