Today Nick Clegg reminded us of his passion for reform of the House of Lords. He bravely told the Lords constitution committee: "I believe legitimacy in democracy is best delivered through the ballot box". To their faces, he told them they were illegitimate. But if he was strident and righteous on this, he was less candid on how and when it might change.

At times Clegg seemed close to frustration, insisting that compositional change of the House of Lords does not necessitate re-evaluation of its function. Over the last 60 years it has become more partisan and tribal, he claimed, but its purpose and relationship to the House of Commons has remained the same. Though quick to qualify that he didn’t think arcane debate about what the Lords would do and look like following any reform was deliberately obstructive, he exasperatedly quipped about the "irony" that those who normally welcomed evolutionary change were being so stubborn on this point.

It was therefore apt that so much of the hearing focused on these esoteric questions – justified, certainly, for none have more of a vested interest in their answers than the Lords themselves – but a bit more resolve on the how and when wouldn’t have gone amiss.

Clegg hinted that the "first tranche" of upper house elections was an aim for 2015, while diffidently admitting the coalition’s "fairly stately pace so far". Will it find a place in this year’s Queen’s Speech, he was asked. The issues of economic stability and fiscal solvency meant that Lords reform was secondary, he said, though he stressed that it wasn’t an "either/or" situation.

Tellingly, he noted that Lords reform would be at the bottom of the coalition’s list of priorities if anything serious were to develop on the subject of Scottish independence. Incidentally, earlier in the hearing he urged the SNP to have courage in their convictions, and, if they really want it, to stop obfuscating and confusing the issue of independence. Given his reticence on a timetable for reform and his subtle Salmond baiting, it seems unlikely we’ll see any change too soon.

So Lords reform is ardent passion of Clegg’s, and for the first time all three major parties seem open to the idea (the Labour Party advocating referendum on the subject, an argument Clegg interestingly disagrees with), but it’s not a priority for government.

If Clegg wants government to have ‘legitimacy’, and if he wants to avoid looking like the dictator who uses his country’s socio-economic instability to stall any progress towards democracy, then the issue of Lords reform and the creation of elected upper house must take greater priority. Maybe it will take baby steps and the obstructive questions about function may have to be answered to satisfy the detractors, but this is an issue too big to sideline.

Tags: Lords Constitution Committee, Lords reform, Nick Clegg