Orders of the Day: Another day of Throne Speech debate?

You know, I'm really starting to wonder if Government House Leader Jay Hill is trying to beat some sort of parliamentary record for fewest hours in the House devoted to real, legislative business: as we head into the fourteenth day since the Speech from the Throne reconvened the Fortieth Parliament for a third session, precisely one day -- a half day, actually, since it was a Friday -- has been dedicated to debating a government bill. Other than that, it's been nothing but burning off supply days, from opposition motions to budget and Speech-related business. Which would be one thing if that very government hadn't spent two months assuring all and sundry that prorogation was necessary to reboot the agenda, but it did -- but so far, we still seem to be staring at the loading screen. Yes, yes, there is the much-anticipated slew of crime-tackling initiatives that we've been promised will be rolled onto the table in the coming days, but most of those are expected to be virtually identical in form and intent as those that were introduced during the previous session which, in all but a few cases, didn't even make it through second reading last time around.

In any case, today will see the House engrossed in the third of six allotted days debating the Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne; tomorrow is, of course, the final Liberal opposition day of the current supply period, which will call on the government to ensure that the maternal and child health initiative that the PM intends to present to his G8 colleagues in June includes a full range of provisions for family planning, including contraception and -- although the motion doesn't use the word itself -- abortion.

Meanwhile, outside the Chamber, the Afghanistan committee meets behind closed doors to conduct a little housekeeping business; in theory, today's in camera confab could provide the perfect opportunity for the government and the opposition to begin to quietly negotiate an end to the looming battle over parliamentary privilege -- most likely by delivering the uncensored documents to the committee, as requested, but with stringent security provisions applied to ensure that any truly sensitive information remains protected from further disclosure. That is, of course, in theory, mind you. In practice, when it comes to going beyond the now familiar talking points that seemingly treat a parliamentary order to produce with about as much deference as is accorded to a standard Access to Information request, the government has maintained a stony, stubborn silence. Oh, except for a few weeks back, before the House returned, when various unnamed official and unofficial spokespeople were daring the opposition to force an election over the issue.

Also this afternoon:

• Still-relatively-newly-anointed Treasury Board President and government spending scythe-wielder-in-chief Stockwell Day makes his first appearance as such before Government Operations and Estimates
• The Fisheries and Oceans committee gets briefed on the British Columbia Supreme Court's decision on federal-provincial jurisdiction over aquaculture
• Agriculture resumes its study of the "situation of the red meat sector"
• Status of Women continues to look at ways of increasing the participation of women in "non-traditional sectors"
• And finally, Human Resources, Skills and Social Development has the distinction of being one of just a handful of committees considering an actual bill, although admittedly one that results from private members' business, and not, say, a government-backed initiative: they've made it all the way to clause-by-clause review of C-304, which is NDP house leader Libby Davies' proposal to "ensure secure, adequate, accessible and affordable housing for Canadians."