Members of the House of Lords probably have three or four years before the tumbrils start to arrive. But last night’s vote for a fully elected second chamber means that at least a big majority of current appointees are likely to be replaced by elected members. After nearly a century MPs have, at last, managed to break the deadlock.

After big shifts of votes, the majority for a 100 per cent elected House was a clear-cut 113, compared with 38 for an 80 per cent elected chamber.

This does not mean that 100 per cent election will occur. Conservative and Labour leaders have previously favoured the inclusion of some appointed crossbench, expert peers. So the 80 per cent option is still on the table.

However, big issues are still unresolved. There is no agreement about the electoral system to be used (whether by single member seats, regional lists or the single transferable vote), even amongst supporters of election. There are also issues of transition, and phasing over what happens to current life peers.

And what would a large – or even total – elected element mean for the relative power of the second chamber and the balance between the two Houses?

The immediate question is when to legislate. Before last night’s votes, the House of Lords next Tuesday looked certain to vote for a fully appointed second chamber by an even larger majority than the 335 to 110 margin of four years ago. Peers will now have a lot to consider over the weekend. Do they seek to demonstrate their disagreement with the Commons as dramatically as possible? Or will there be moves towards compromise? Given the primacy of the Commons, the Lords cannot have a long-term veto. First will come a draft Bill, then probably detailed legislation some time in 2008.

But if such a Bill still runs into serious opposition in the Lords – possibly in the run-up to the next general election – allies of Gordon Brown suggest that he will then include a detailed pledge to a predominantly elected second chamber in the next Labour manifesto. The Conservatives would probably make a similar commitment. By convention, the Lords could not then obstruct such a manifesto Bill.

Whatever the timing of action, there is pressure for an interim, tidying-up Bill later this year. The cash-for-honours affair has created big doubts about the current system of appointment by political leaders.

The Government has proposed that the current appointments commission should both be made statutory and have its remit widened from just propriety for political nominees to include suitability (this is, will they be active?), as now applies to crossbench nonparty peers.

Most MPs, and many peers, agree that the current procedures for by-elections to replace the remaining 92 hereditaty peers when they die should end, while there should also be scope for retirement and resignation. Such a Bill would now be seen as a preliminary to the much larger legislation over the composition of the second chamber.

Last night’s votes were historic by any standards. MPs have taken a decision. But they are far from the end of the debate about the role, functions and powers of the Lords.

Path to reform

Tuesday, March 13

House of Lords votes on future composition

— Government then considers results of votes in both Houses

— Cross-party group to be reconvened to discuss next stages of reform

May/June

Government announces future plans for second chamber

Summer/early autumn

Draft bill on composition, role and powers

Early autumn

Possible Bill to make appointments commission statutory and to remove remaining hereditary peers

Late winter or spring 2008

Detailed Bill presented to Parliament

Autumn 2008

In case of trouble over the Bill in the Lords, Labour promises manifesto pledge to legislation after next election

Times Recommends

• Bank charges hit us for being human
• Sorry, Father, thou still shalt not steal
• The shed where Santa’s failures go to die