Those souls for whom the contest to replace Michael Howard already seems to have been rumbling on for an eternity deserve sympathy. It has, after all, taken longer than any previous such spectacle. And we are still, technically, in the phoney war. Yesterday’s decision to reject new rules for such elections at least has the merit of bringing clarity. The showdown will be decided by all party members after MPs have winnowed the field to two.

The rejection of rule changes proposed by Mr Howard is a messy end to his otherwise creditable leadership. He could, perhaps, have hoped for a show of gratitude for helping the party to its biggest gain of Commons seats since 1983, though making precious little advance in the national vote. His instinct behind the proposed reforms was sound: an effort to reduce the impact of the party membership, whose average age is around 65 and who, on form, favour leader figures in tune with their views but less appealing to the wider electorate. In 2001, the only time the existing rules have been used, they produced Iain Duncan Smith.

But Mr Howard failed on two counts. The proposal itself was flawed. To try to replace a system of direct democracy with an opaque and artificial consultation, a step back towards the magic circle that used to produce Tory leaders, mocked the party’s claims to modernity. And despite signs that the proposal was in danger of failing, Mr Howard’s campaigning for it was half-hearted at best. The result is therefore unsatisfactory. But any temptation to dwell on it should be resisted. All thoughts of introducing an electoral college similar to Labour’s, which would weight the influence of MPs, party bigwigs and the grassroots, should be postponed. The priority for Conservatives is to elect themselves a leader, without delay. There may be no actual vacancy until Mr Howard formally resigns next week at the party conference in Blackpool. But the contest now enters its vital phase.

David Davis, the Shadow Home Secretary, and David Cameron, the Shadow Education Secretary, will officially launch their campaigns this week. They join the three declared candidates, Kenneth Clarke, Liam Fox, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, and Sir Malcolm Rifkind. Together, they present the party with a broad choice. Much is known about the merits and otherwise of all five candidates by fellow MPs. Indeed, the high number of MPs who backed the rule changes may reflect concerns among those wary of Mr Clarke’s baggage that the status quo would help him.

It is now incumbent on Sir Michael Spicer, the chairman of the 1922 Committee, to get things moving. MPs have, after all, spent all summer considering whom to back and need no more time. The decisive round of voting by grassroots members can also be organised on a tight timetable. If the two remaining candidates take part in a televised debate or two, party members will quickly size them up. What must not be allowed to happen is for the contest to slide into the new year. That would leave Her Majesty’s Opposition looking indulgent and negligent.