Higher court fees have pushed up the costs of taking children into care in Kent by £45,000 in just six months, social services chiefs say.

Kent County Council has been forced to pay higher court fees for initiating care proceedings to safeguard children at risk since April.

The hike - which the county council has no control over and was introduced by the courts - has seen social services facing an additional £45,000 cost.

It has been suggested that the increase in fees to start care proceedings is deterring cash-strapped authorities from starting care proceedings. Since April, councils must pay £4,000 to the courts to apply for care orders - up from £150.

However, KCC said the interests of children were paramount and costs were not an issue social workers decided whether to take children at risk into care through court orders.

Cllr Leyland Ridings (Con), KCC’s cabinet member for children and families Leyland Ridings said: "The strength of Kent’s children’s social services is that we put the best interests of the child first. Since the Public Law Outline was introduced by government and adopted by KCC, the estimated additional spend on the new court proceedings is approximately £45,000. What I want to make categorically clear is that if a child is in need of protection then court proceedings will be made and at no time would cost prevent this from happening."

There were regular reviews of social services budgets to take into account the prospect of additional costs, he added.

"Members and senior officers are mindful of the duties and responsibilities of children’s services and the need to ensure these are appropriately resourced. As such, this is regularly reviewed."

The assurance came after a warning that budget constraints were sometimes leaving social workers over-stretched when it comes to their job of looking after the county’s most vulnerable children.

Graham Badman, the county council’s children’s services director, said while he was confident the authority was doing all it could to minimise the dangers to children at risk but more money would improve the standard of care KCC was capable of offering.

In a briefing to a backbench committee of county councillors at a meeting (Nov 12) in the wake of the Baby P scandal, Mr Badman said: "Do we have procedures I am confident about? Yes, we do. Do we have the resources that I would wish? No, we do not. That is because in any process of dispensing public money, there is a rationing....and conflicting priorities that members have to balance," he said.

He added: "But I would not wish to pretend that there are not occasions when social services staff are over-stretched. They cope because they are well managed and extraordinarily motivated. I think you can have some comfort that what you have in Kent is probably the best service you could against the budget that is allocated to it."

ends