Keighley and Ilkley MP Kris Hopkins has criticised peers who voted against Government plans to place a £26,000 cap on the amount of benefits a single family can claim in a single year.

In particular Mr Hopkins singled out for criticism an amendment tabled by the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds, The Rt Rev John Packer, which proposed that the maximum a family could claim in benefits would be the equivalent to the take home pay of someone on a £50,000 annual salary.

"Whilst the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds and his colleagues were, I am sure, well-intentioned by what they thought they were trying to achieve, they were sadly misguided and ended up being used by Labour in their shallow attempts to embarrass the Government," Mr Hopkins said.

The bishop's amendment that child benefit should not be included in the cap - as it was a universal benefit payable to all families irrespective of their income - was backed by an alliance of Lib Dem, Labour and crossbench peers, ensuring the government's proposals were defeated by 252 votes to 237.

Such a move, however, means that, unless the government can overcome this vote in the Commons, there will be no theoretical limit on the amount payable to families with children, as with each child, new universal benefits will accrue. The amendment and the bishop's vote against welfare reform has also been heavily criticised by the former Archbishop of Canterbury and former head of the Anglican Church, Lord Carey. Writing in the Daily Mail, Lord Carey disputed any idea that the bishops who backed the amendment could 'lay claim to the moral high ground' and argued that the 'greatest moral scandal' facing the country is the scale of the Government's debt because it is mortgaging the future of our children and grandchildren.

"By seeking to almost double the Government's proposed ceiling of £500 a week - equivalent to the average household wage after tax - these unelected individuals have sought to add £600 million a year to the bill faced by taxpayers and shown they are totally out of step with the views of real people," Mr Hopkins commented.

"Labour say they are in favour of a benefits cap but will not say would that cap would be.

"Our country cannot afford to let things stay as they are and changes must be made. Work must always be a more attractive option than remaining on benefits. We must see an end to the situation where, in some households, no-one has worked for two and sometimes three generations.

"I do not want to see children placed in poverty or people made homeless and there are strong safeguards in the Welfare Reform Bill to stop this from happening."

The Labour Party have said they support the idea of a cap, but claim as it stands it could end up costing the taxpayer more if 20,000 families have to be rehoused.

Mr Hopkins said he will now vote to overturn the decision when the Welfare Reform Bill returns to the House of Commons in the coming weeks.