Transfer notes

They are a powerful communications tool – oops, I nearly described them as a "marketing" tool, and therein lies the rub. If the consultation document is often dismissed as too dull, the video is often dismissed as too glitzy. There's no denying that councils try hard, with help from public relations advisers, to make the video accessible; but mood music, photogenic presenters and seductively attractive (or depressing) shots of the area give rise to concerns about pressure and bias.

One or two transfers have gone for the "let's talk straight" approach with unscripted, straight-to-camera interviews. But how is there any control over the accuracy of the information being supplied? Is a 15-minute video the place for a debate? The format needs revisiting.

Perhaps, if budgets can stand it – and opponents to transfer are always ready to leap on video expenditure as evidence of excess – there should be two videos. One should be an airing of the issues, produced under the auspices of the independent tenants' adviser; the second in scripted form summarising the formal offer. Expensive and time-consuming perhaps, but isn't this a price worth paying to get tenants properly engaged?