In response to calls from Driffield Town Council to support their objections to the site being developed into a new supermarket, shops, cafe, community hall and homes, Mr Knight has slammed the planning process.

Mr Knight said: “UK planning law is something of a mess and most people are amazed to learn that I, as a Member of Parliament for Driffield and the surrounding area of East Yorkshire, have no vote whatsoever in the planning process. This is a state of affairs I regard as highly unsatisfactory.

“What is unfortunate, is that developers can always appeal against refusal of planning permission, but local residents, aggrieved by a planning approval, have no right of appeal whatsoever,” he added.

Mr Knight has vowed to take on board the opinions of local residents from both sides, but has reminded the town council that development at the site is inevitable.

“The land in question is in the ownership of more than one person and it is not public land to the extent that it is owned by central or local government, but it is in the hands, mainly, of private owners.

“It is quite clear that some form of development is going to proceed and that some residents will be unhappy whatever happened because they have had four years or so enjoyment of a relatively quiet area since the closure of the cattle market,” he added.

The proposal has been formally referred to the regional Government Office in Leeds, but no decision on whether or not it will be called in for public inquiry has yet been made.

Meanwhile, Foston-on-the-Wolds Parish Council has backed calls for a public inquiry amid concerns about the impact the development will have on Driffield.

In a letter to the town council, Richard Mole, clerk to Foston-on-the-Wolds Parish Council, said: “The additional pressure upon existing small businesses would be intolerable, and this would create a significant negative effect in the town centre. There is also an unacceptable car parking regime in existence which could not satisfy a visit to both town centre and supermarket.”

Mr Mole added that the traffic routes for the planned development were “unsatisfactory” and that additional traffic would create a “significant road safety hazard.”