NEWTON Abbot MP Martin Wrigley has called for clarity over how the government’s nature watchdog responded to a planning controversy in his constituency.

He has written to Environment Secretary Emma Reynolds with questions about Natural England’s response to the NA3 housing development at Wolborough.

The latest stage of the plan to build 1,200 homes in fields on the outskirts of the town has been mired in controversy for years.

Objectors say there is insufficient evidence to prove that the development will not cause harm to the unique Wolborough Fen nature area which lies below the site.

They fear that the water running off from the new development will find its way into the fen, putting at risk its rare plant species.

Developers Vistry Homes say the fen is safe in their hands, and the site lies outside the catchment area for water draining into the fen.

The issue will be resolved by a planning inquiry later in the spring, but in the meantime Mr Wrigley has queried how Natural England compiled its information in the lead-up to its endorsement of Vistry’s proposals.

The Devon Wildlife Trust, for instance, raised concerns about the future of the fen, but Natural England said it was satisfied there was no risk.

Earlier this year the BBC reported on a campaigner’s Freedom of Information Act request which had found an internal email from a senior specialist at Natural England which said protection of the water supply had not yet been demonstrated and further investigation was needed.

Natural England said at the time that a single email was ‘in no way reflective’ of its overall expert opinion.

Mr Wrigley’s letter says: ‘Wolborough Fen is a site of significant ecological importance, and many residents are seeking reassurance that environmental protections are being applied consistently and independently within the current planning system.

‘Liberal Democrats strongly support the delivery of new homes, but believe this must be achieved in a way that maintains public confidence in environmental safeguards.’

He also said local people needed more clarity on how the government ensured that Natural England considered the advice of scientists around development in protected habitats.

He went on: ‘I have been made aware of claims that Natural England’s final position in relation to this site may differ from advice provided by some of its internal specialists.’

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, which oversees the work of Natural England, has been invited to comment.