Reform of the House of Lords has been put off, again. Gordon Brown has decided that this is a “manifesto issue”, not a matter for early legislation in this Parliament.

There has been a pause since the Commons voted three months ago for a wholly elected second chamber, and the Lords for a wholly appointed one. The problem is less this stalemate than the many unresolved questions. A meeting last month of the Cabinet committee on constitutional affairs (known as CA and chaired by Jack Straw, the Leader of the Commons) decided that a lot more work needs to be done. This was also the predominant view of the cross-party group on Lords reform.

At heart is the familiar dilemma over the balance between composition and powers: the more elected members there are, the more assertive the reformed House is likely to be. How can the supremacy of the Commons be enshrined? How will differences between the House be reconciled without gridlock? Also, what system will be used to elect members? If it is a regional list system asking voters to choose between groups drawn up by the parties, won’t party managers have effectively the same powers of patronage as under appointment? How will life peers be phased out?

Mr Straw has been asked to prepare options for both an 80 and 100 per cent elected House. The main ministerial preference is still for the former (with the balance coming largely from nonparty peers), especially since the majority for a wholly elected chamber was inflated by “wrecking” votes by supporters of an appointed House.

Gordon Brown's Black Wednesday

The Northern Rock disaster has torn away any remaining credibility the Prime Minister had

Background

• Sorry story tests Gordon to the limit

• Gordon, how wonderful, wise and talented am I?

• Brown’s brain and his hand are not always connected

• How 'cruel' schooling scarred Brown

A statement is likely before the end of July, promising further consultations and yet another White Paper. Specific proposals will then be set out in the next Labour manifesto. Including a detailed plan in the manifesto would be in order to overcome any resistance in the Lords after the next election.

Mr Brown has, for some time, been inclined to take this approach. This is partly because he does not want his government to be bogged down in a time-consuming battle in the Lords. But he is also keen for the future of the Lords to be considered as part of the wider debate on reviving constitutional reform.

In the interim, the Government is keeping a close eye on a Private Member’s Bill put forward by Lord Steel of Aikwood, the former Liberal leader, which is due to have its second reading on July 20. It would prevent the remaining 92 hereditary peers from being replaced through by-elections, put the appointments commission on a statutory basis and make it responsible for selecting new peers.

Ministers support some of these aims, but fear the Bill risks preempting the question of election: along the lines that since anomalies have been removed, why do any more? But there is still momentum for change: elections could start around the time of the London Olympics.

Times Recommends

• Olympic-size television coming to your town
• Mosley opens new front in battle for privacy
• Decorator fined for smoking in van