Councillor Says Developer’s Tactic ‘Is Trying to Subvert the Planning System’

Published on: 22 Feb, 2026
Updated on: 22 Feb, 2026

A banner displayed by campaigners in Normandy.

By Isabelle Trubshaw

A local councillor has described a developer’s attempt to garner supportive comments for its Normandy planning application as “a tactic trying to subvert the planning system by distorting the genuine public response”.

Cllr Keith Witham

Cllr Keith Whitman (Con, Normandy & Pirbright) echoed the concerns of Normandy residents following an improbable level of support for Taylor Wimpey’s latest application for a huge development of up to 950 homes.

As of 7pm Saturday (February 21), there were 218 comments on the Guildford Borough Council (GBC) planning site objecting to the proposal and 129 in support. Campaigners who have analysed the comments believe that all, or almost all of the submissions via the consultancy firm YourShout were in support of the application.

The planning application submitted last year has faced overwhelming public opposition according to a parish council survey, which found that 95.6 per cent of respondents objected to the proposals — 82.5 per cent “strongly against” and 13.1 per cent “against” — while only two per cent expressed support.

See: Second Normandy Survey Shows Huge Opposition to Plan for 950 Homes

In light of the survey result, locals are questioning the reliability and origins of the supportive comments submitted to Guildford Borough Council, which will consider the application. There is no requirement for those making comments to live in a certain proximity to a development site.

Taylor Wimpey has confirmed that, in line with common practice, it had employed “specialist consultants” from YourShout to carry out doorstep surveys in the local area to gather further local feedback.

A TW spokesperson said that all responses – both positive and negative – were shared with GBC, that signed consent had been obtained from the residents prior to submission, and that no payment was provided to any individual who took part in the survey process.

The spokesperson said: “Some of [the comments] have been displayed in full and some partially on the council website. We do not control which comments are selected for this.”

Cllr Fiona White

Cllr Fiona White (Lib Dem, Ash Wharf), lead councillor for Planning at GBC, said that GBC publishes all comments submitted to them, except where comments are identified as potentially offensive or inappropriate.

She added that while her team are aware of concerns raised, it is not the council’s role to investigate the “motivation behind representations relating to planning applications”.

Cllr Simon Schofield

The chair of Normandy Parish Council, Simon Schofield, has questioned the reliability of YourShout’s submissions.

“It is suspicious that we have been unable to find any responses [on the GBC website, apparently from YourShout] that object to the application or even mention any areas of concern regarding the site’s suitability.”

He added that most responses appear to have been submitted in batches and contained similar wording, consisting of a generic paragraph with little reference to the application itself.

Several residents have also criticised the conduct of YourShout’s doorstep surveys.

One resident on social media said: “If you say you are not in support of the housing, [the consultant] hightails it quickly unless like me I give them my thoughts on it and make them write my thoughts down. I bet they didn’t hand that paper in.”

Another resident explained that he was not given the chance to confirm his objections after mentioning that he was a volunteer for NAG.

Concerns have also been raised about where the supporters are based. Fiona White explained that while the name of the commenter is displayed on their submission, their personal details, such as their home address, is removed.

While Taylor Wimpey stated that feedback was collected across Normandy, Flexford, Wood Street Village, Fairlands, Ash, and parts of west Guildford, Simon Schofield suggested that many names were not recognised as local to the area.

Normandy Action Group Website

Mike Aaronson, chair of Normandy Action Group (NAG), confirmed: “It is not clear where these people who are giving their support are living, nor in what terms the proposal has been presented to them, and therefore how informed their ‘support’ is.”

He added: “We (NAG) don’t write people’s submissions for them, and we don’t submit them on their behalf. What Yes To Homes are doing leaves a very bad taste in the mouth.”

A earlier supportive comment submitted by email showing the YourShout origin.

Campaigners have noted that supportive comments were originally submitted as email from YourShout but now appear on the GBC planning portal in plain text. Most if not all of the supporting comments follow contain very similar wording believed to have been written by those conducting the YourShout survey.

More recent supportive comments appear in this format and have very similar content. Normandy villagers have been unable to recognise the names given, leading them to conclude that the comments are not from those who live in Normandy.

But unless false identities have been created or identities misused and comments created or misrepresented, it seems no laws have been broken.

Taylor Wimpey’s planning application in Normandy follows the dismissal of a similar development proposal made in 2016-2019. However, recent changes to the national planning policy framework (NPPF) adopted in December 2024 introduced mandatory housing targets and relaxes protection of green belt land to be used where necessary.

Some campaigners believe that this may increase pressure on the council to approve the application – a decision anticipated to be made by summer 2026.

However, Fiona White has confirmed that planning decisions are made having considered relevant planning policies and all other material considerations. She said: “Decisions are not made based on the number of objections versus the number of letters of support.”

Other planning applications made by Taylor Wimpey, such as the current proposal for Tongham, have also received significant disapproval from residents – 96 per cent against. Cllr Ed Hall, Tongham Parish Council leader, said that no contentious support comments have as yet appeared.

Responses to Councillor Says Developer’s Tactic ‘Is Trying to Subvert the Planning System’

Jim Allen Reply

February 23, 2026 at 9:04 am

A genuine planning objection or problem has been identified, specifically regarding infrastructure such as a lack of water, electricity, or sewage treatment capacity, which suggests the proposal may be unviable. It is also noted that Grampian clauses exceeding the planning application’s lifespan are technically illegal.

Effective planning objections should legally have more influence over planning application outcomes than numerous submissions expressing approval, or governmental propaganda or mandates.
Amos Ankrah Reply

February 23, 2026 at 12:47 pm

Well said Jim.

I don’t think that the community would have a problem with this if Your Shout were acting in good faith.

This company appears to be:

approaching people with little or no understanding of the context of this out of scale development in the middle of nowhere;

selecting only views supportive of the application;

claiming that by approving the Normandy development, somehow other areas will be spared;

exaggerating the chance of infrastructure improvements that are not guaranteed the importance of things that there is no guaranteed, such as a SEND school;

not pointing out that there is no obligation to deliver so called “affordable housing”.

And that’s not even taking into account the massive investment that would be needed to rectify the issues associated with such a large development in a poorly connected area – with commensurate council tax increases.

I think we must also question Cllr Fiona White here. If it is not her job to investigate possible malpractice. Who exactly are we paying with our not insignificant council tax to do this?
Peta Malthouse Reply

February 23, 2026 at 1:18 pm

There are signs that comments to support the proposal have been obtained from a wide area. One correspondent from Witley said on social media that they had been interviewed on the application by a doorstep campaigner, another name indicates a Cranleigh origin, while one from Wood Street reported they were asked to support it so that there would be less chance of development in their area.

Some of the responses welcome the addition of shops and open space but Normandy has a shop and the proposed development is on our existing open space.