I've just got back from the launch of a paper by Boris Johnson's mate Stephen Greenhalgh, the Conservative leader of Hammersmith & Fulham council that could have significant implications for social housing in the UK.
Greenhalgh and surveyor John Moss have co-authored a report that wants to see social housing rents brought up to near-market levels
The pair are suggesting setting rents against market levels for each area rather than a broadly set "social housing rent" rate. The theory is that this would massively increase the value of social housing stock and therefore the ability to borrow.
Other reforms suggested in the report include writing off some of the debt owed to central government by local authorities to plough back into housing in that area.In fact they estimate that their reforms would increase the money available to councils and RSLs by £5bn each year.
You can read their thoughts on the Conservative blog here
However - as was argued at the launch today - some of these proposals are treading a thin line between reforming and ring-fencing areas of deprivation.
If social housing rents are set by area and not housing tenure, to be a tenant in Kensington will be far more expensive than in Hackney, for instance. Inevitably "ghetto areas" where poorer tenants can afford to live will spring up, as opposed to areas for better off social tenants.
The paper unveiled today proposes adapting the personal income support per tenant to allow them to claim more or less depending on circumstances, rather than set regimented housing benefits, and get round the dilemma that way.
A lot of number crunching has gone into this report, which should be taken seriously by the sector. Grant Shapps, shadow housing secretary, had sent a member of his department to frantically take notes at the back of the room.
When asked whether Tory Central would take on these ideas on their almost inevitable election next year, Greenhalgh's response was "whether government adopt it or not, it is going to happen."
