Why Is Hartlepool Shipping Vulnerable Children 300 Miles Away – And What Does It Say About Hartlepool Borough Council?

Hampshire Road Sign

Freedom of information request by a member of the public lifts the lid on just why Hartlepool Borough Council is shelling out tens of thousands of pounds on care costs to a local council nearly 300 miles away.

21st November 2025

A Freedom of Information (FOI) response has shed new light on a controversial £126,490 payment Hartlepool Borough Council made to Hampshire County Council for “residential care” — a transaction first highlighted by the Teesside & Durham Post in an article published back in October 2025.

At first glance, it looks like yet another case of Hartlepool taxpayers funding services outside our own community, with nothing coming back in return. But the story runs much deeper than one six-figure invoice. It exposes a structural failure in how children’s services are being funded, how placements are getting handled, and perhaps most importantly, how Hartlepool Council has allowed itself to become reliant on expensive, distant solutions instead of investing in its own provision.

A Secure Home 300 Miles From Hartlepool — Because There Was No Room Anywhere Else?

The FOI response reveals that the £126,490 wasn’t just for an ordinary care home, but for a secure children’s home placement — one of the most serious forms of accommodation used when a child is deemed to be 'at extreme risk'.

These placements aren’t chosen locally. They’re said to be allocated by the Secure Welfare Coordination Unit (SWCU), a national body run by Hampshire County Council.

According to the council:

Placements are allocated based on first availability.

In other words, if there’s only one secure bed available in the entire country, even if it’s 300 miles away, that’s where Hartlepool has to send the child — with no competitive process, no local option, and no say over the cost.

This raises a key question:

Why are vulnerable Hartlepool children being sent to the other end of the country because “first availability” is all that’s left?

Secure welfare beds are said to be in constant national shortage. Councils across the UK are reportedly fighting over a limited supply. And because there are no secure beds in Hartlepool — or even nearby — the town is being forced to pay whatever is demanded by whichever authority or provider happens to have the space.

The Cost to Taxpayers: A Quiet, Expensive Crisis

Hartlepool Borough Council also confirmed the payment covered “5 or fewer” children — meaning each placement could easily cost tens of thousands of pounds.

And that’s just one invoice.

The FOI also revealed something even more alarming:

Hartlepool currently has 18 children placed outside the North East.

That’s 18 children living in unfamiliar areas — far from families, communities, and schools — because the local council cannot meet their needs locally.

All happening while Hartlepool is facing budget pressures across all departments,

and now claims it's struggling to afford to maintain basic local services without further government support, Yet six-figure payments continue to flow out of town.

No Contract. No Scrutiny. No Tender. No Local Benefit.

Hartlepool Borough Council admitted that:

• No procurement or tendering took place.

• No contract exists with Hampshire or any other authority for these placements.

• The cost simply lands on Hartlepool’s desk, and the bill must be paid.

  
  

This means:

• Hartlepool has no ability to negotiate rates.

• There is zero financial competition to keep costs down.

• The council has no long-term plan to prevent future expensive placements.

The SWCU system may be necessary in emergencies — but it's leaving Hartlepool taxpayers footing enormous bills with seemingly no oversight and no choice.

A Symptom of a Much Bigger Problem

This single payment reflects a far more broader issue: Hartlepool has almost no specialist children’s provision of its own, despite decades of increasing demand.

Only recently did councillors vote to borrow £1 million to try to finally set up local children’s homes — a move that critics claim should have happened years ago.

Until those homes exist, Hartlepool BC is bouncing children across the country like parcels, paying premium rates because the council reportedly has no alternative.

This £126,490 payment may be justified on paper — but it’s also said to be a symptom of the council’s repeated long-term failure to invest in the right infrastructure at the right time.

Because whether it’s social care, housing, planning, or regeneration, the same pattern at Hartlepool Borough Council keeps emerging:

Hartlepool Borough Council Reacts.

It does not plan ahead adequately .

And local people are footing the bill.