A NORTH-EAST MP is demanding answers from the Government over its pledge to give communities a greater say on wind farm applications.

Phil Wilson, MP for Sedgefield in County Durham, is seeking a clarification on the coalition’s plans to decentralise the planning process surrounding onshore wind farms, claiming the measures fails to address large scale developments.

Speaking in the House of Commons earlier this month, Mark Prisk, minister of state for Communities and Local Government, said guidelines would be issued to councils to ensure local plans address the “adverse impacts from wind farms developments, including cumulative landscape and visual impact.”

He also outlined legal reforms that would make it compulsory for onshore wind developers to consult communities before they submit a planning application.

“The need for renewable energy does not automatically override environmental protections and the planning concerns of local communities,” said Mr Prisk.

He also stated: “Where councils have identified areas suitable for onshore wind, they should not feel they have to give permission for speculative applications outside those areas when they judge the impact to be unacceptable.”

Mr Wilson, however, fears some communities may miss out, as the Secretary of State, rather than the local authority, has the ultimate say on applications involving wind farms that generate more than 50 megawatts (mw) of electricity.

In a letter to Mr Prisk, Mr Wilson asks:” Does the announcement mean that if the local planning authority and the local community are opposed, the Secretary of State will also be minded to oppose the application on the basis of the objections?”

Mr Wilson has been fighting to give communities a greater say in wind farm decisions for months.

He is particularly concerned about E.On’s plans to a build a 24-turbine development near Newton Aycliffe, called The Isles.

Because the controversial development would generate more than 50 mw it is deemed a matter of “national significance.”

However, Mr Wilson said the level of controversy surrounding the scheme meant it should be local planners, not a government minister, who determined the application.