Object all you like about some piece of Class D airspace but until YOU can sufficiently show there willl be GREATER issues to flight safety by the establishment of such airspace, nobody will listen.
It may be counter-intuitive initially, but one of the biggest arguments against TAG's proposals is that they will actually decrease safety.
They take a large amount of airspace currently available to all, and give a small number priority there. The effect of that may be to reduce very slightly an already small collision risk for the few, but increase it substantially for the many who are pushed into the choke points.
Add to that the question of why those few should take preference over the many and these proposals should be resisted strongly.
It's no use arguing that Class D is open to all. Real traffic data shows that GA pilots route around it when it is created, pushing traffic into those choke points. It doesn't really matter why, it's what happens. But in fact there are good reasons why. For glider pilots for example, the likely restrictions on routing are a severe problem. And the new SERA rules on VFR are going to make it very difficult to fly in that airspace, since gliders will not legally be able to climb to within 1000ft of cloudbase. For other GA pilots it's much simpler to plan around it than run several plans just in case a crossing clearance isn't granted.
There are much better ways of addressing TAG's issues than granting swathes of class D.
I'd encourage everyone to object to TAG's proposals on their website. Don't answer their questions - they're designed to get the answer they want. There's a chance to put some free format stuff in section E. Say what you think.