The Government has just returned to the fray with another attempt to progress the stalled reform of the House of Lords.
Regrettably it appears to have missed the opportunity to address weaknesses in the wider constitutional make-up of the UK. 
While it could well be argued that House of Lords reform alone is a difficult enough circle to square, the fact remains that there are issues around the regional and local structures of UK governance which could, and should, be addressed, as part of the process of reforming the second chamber.
The combined pressures of achieving cross-party support, the long history of this debate, and the delicate political balancing required to maintain the primacy of the Commons mean the Government has been particularly challenged to bring any proposals at all, and these may well yet fail, as have other attempts before.
But could more not have been done to address the long-standing counter-devolutionary tendencies of the current political system?
Proposals have previously been brought forward to create a link between central and local government by indirectly electing representatives to the House of Lords on the basis of regional votes. This is so local councillors form an electoral college, or local parties produce closed lists. Admittedly, there are weaknesses in such a system.
Yet, if the majority of the new Lords – or senators – are to serve a 15-year term, some churn among  other members may act as a stimulus and provide the new ideas, approaches and challenge that outsiders frequently believe our legislature needs.
Someone might even suggest a best value exercise on the arcane voting systems that characterise parliament.
The basic problem is that the UK lacks a constitutional settlement – a formal statement setting out the role and function of local government.
In particular, there is no voice for councils and regions of the type written into or encouraged in other constitutions, worldwide. It is worth reflecting that it may be the combined lack of constitutional protection and city-wide, county, and regional representation in the UK legislature which has led to Britain becoming the highly centralised state it is today. 
But, we are assured, there is now cross-party recognition that centralisation does not work. The tide of centralisation is on the ebb.
Local government is soon to have leadership of place that it has not enjoyed for decades. We must be forgiven a sense of irony that while a Bill on local government, devolving powers to the localities is passing through its committee stages in one part of the house, the Lords reform proposals are firmly planted in a different silo. Joined-up government, it is not. But it could be.
If local councillors were to be indirectly elected to the Lords, then in terms of function, no-one would be better placed than elected Lord Councillors in scrutinising legislation and recommending the tier of governance best fitted to implement new laws.
With this power to scrutinise and recommend, might not the power to introduce new bye-laws, proposed in the Local Government bill, allow councils to introduce differences into the localities that would be similar to those at present possible in Scotland, Wales and potentially, Northern Ireland?
As he prepares to step down from office, the prime minister has been anxious to stress that his failures have been primarily caused by his willingness to compromise. He suggests he has not been radical enough or pushed the cause of reform as strongly as he should.
People can take these comments at face value, or with a pinch of salt, but there can be no doubt that Jack Straw's White Paper, entitled, The House of Lords: Reform, might better be designated The House of Lords: Fudge.
Is the reform to be an opportunity missed? Can local councillors rise above the constraints of party politics and seize an opportunity unlikely to materialise again for a few decades?
Cllr Dave Wilcox is chair of the Local Government Information Unit