Hartlepool regeneration funding fails to shift political backlash in northern England

Traders Union
All News
Financial News
Hartlepool regeneration funding backlash

Highlights

Hartlepool has received more national regeneration funding per head than any other place in England since 2016, including £25mn from the towns fund.
Despite per capita funding for deprived areas reaching £470, political backlash persists as Reform UK gained all Hartlepool council seats last month.
Public First analysis links higher funding per head to a 5-7 percentage point increase in Reform UK vote share, raising questions about policy impact.

Funding record and local delivery

As reported by Financial Times, Hartlepool has received more national regeneration funding per head than any other place in England over the 10 years since the Brexit referendum, with money channelled through schemes including the Shared Prosperity Fund, the Levelling Up Fund, the Towns Fund and the Pride in Place Fund. In the town centre, that spending has supported fresh paving, a new railway platform, upgraded shop frontages and vocational training facilities, while a £25mn towns fund launched under Boris Johnson has aimed to back economic renewal rather than only cosmetic works.

Darren Hankey, principal of Hartlepool College and chair of the board that selected and delivered towns fund projects, says new academies for civil engineering and construction are helping younger people and adults gain qualifications for work in the sector. But he also says it remains unclear whether the investment is changing the financial reality of daily life across the wider Hartlepool economy.

That tension is echoed by residents who say physical improvements do not answer deeper cost-of-living pressures. Barber Graham McBain says people appreciate the investment but still question why money is being spent on town-centre projects when many households have little money to spend.

Political fallout and wider England trend

Despite the scale of support, Hartlepool continues to turn against incumbent parties, reflecting a broader pattern across deprived areas of England that backed Leave. After voting 70 per cent to leave the EU, the town elected its first Conservative MP in 2021, returned to Labour's column in 2024 with the wider red wall shift, and this year gave Reform UK all council seats contested in last month's election.

Analysis by consultancy Public First says the funding has largely gone to struggling places, with the most deprived tenth of local authority areas receiving £470 per head compared with £60 in the most affluent areas. The consultancy also says better-funded local authorities show a Reform UK vote share 5 to 7 percentage points higher than otherwise similar places, and that each 10-point rise in Reform support is associated with an extra £170 per head in funding.

Damayanti Chatterjee of Public First says the money was often directed to the right areas, but the capital schemes did not change the political mood. Luke Tryl of More in Common says the failure of levelling-up promises has been more damaging than the pre-existing situation, while David Phillips of the Institute for Fiscal Studies says there is little evidence that UK regeneration money has worked, partly because of overlapping schemes and unclear funding periods.

Local voices say the core issue remains jobs and economic opportunity. Tony, a 63-year-old steel worker in Hartlepool, says employment is the town's biggest problem, while local publican and former Labour mayoral candidate Leo Gillen says even voters in stable public-sector careers now back Reform because they feel failed by both Labour and the Conservatives.

Our earlier report on Labour’s leadership transition around Andy Burnham focused on how political uncertainty was intensifying expectations of an early first Budget and possible new taxes on wealth and assets. We noted that advisers and investors were concerned about growing tax complexity and potential market fallout, even as Burnham’s team signalled interest in a more pro-growth, simplified approach.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.