The clocks may have moved forward but the House of Keys agenda may appear a little stuck in the previous time.

A quick glance at the question paper for the sitting today (Tuesday) does not just uncover some familiar subjects, it actually has one question identical to last week’s order paper.

In fairness to Clare Bettison (Douglas East), the MHK responsible for a very familiar question asking for a breakdown of pupil numbers in Douglas’ two high schools over the last 10 years, that’s because she should have had an answer last week.

In fact, Education Minister Graham Cregeen stood up to deliver that answer last week and proclaimed that as it was ’quite detailed’ he had circulated a copy.

But it turned out the copy had not been circulated due to a ’technical problem’.

Speaker Juan Watterson asked Miss Bettison if she had any supplementary questions to ask, to which she replied, not unreasonably: ’Based on what?’ This seemed a fair point, especially as a question to the effect of ’has the definition of supplementary changed?’ would have been ruled out of order.

So we try again today. The reason for the question, of course, is the proposed changes of catchment for Scoill yn Jubilee pupils.

Not all parents are delighted at the idea of switching them to go to St Ninian’s, as opposed to Ballakermeen, in future years.

Mr Cregeen will also find himself on familiar territory when the subject of school meals comes up again. We’ve had questions over their nutritional value and now Julie Edge (Onchan) wants to know what qualifications are held by anyone who gives advice on the quality of school meals, particularly those responsible for them in each school.

Not to be flippant, but if any of that advice is that tapioca pudding is good for you then more questions need to be asked.

Ms Edge also wants to know whether the source of fresh food products for school meals is checked.

Other questions include patient transfer services using Easyjet and the Steam Packet and an apparent change in policy over the need for serious case reviews on all deaths of vulnerable people in custody.

Staple subjects such as pensions, planning, housing and motoring all make their way onto the agenda, too.

Two Bills are down for third and final readings in the Keys. These are the Council of Ministers (Amendment) Bill, which we are told is an important constitutional step in ensuring the government doesn’t meddle in the justice system, and the Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Bill.

Fireworks had been expected at the clauses stage of the latter, but it turned out that the government was quite happy to accept a number of amendments tabled by planning committee chairman Tim Baker, who pointed out that the original version of the proposed legislation appeared to forget about the idea of bothering to see whether anyone other than the Council of Ministers wanted input into important changes in planning policy.

The government and other MHKs were less accommodating to Bill Shimmins (Middle), though, who had the temerity to suggest that ignoring a provision in the previous act - that they government should set up a planning consultative body - wasn’t brilliant and perhaps they should make it a statutory obligation under the new bill. Instead, apparently it’s fine to keep the provision in as an option and then continue to ignore it.

In the Legislative Council, the Charities Registration and Regulation Bill returns for another splash of debate. Because the bill started its scrutiny in the upper chamber and it was subsequently amended in the House of Keys, to exempt small charities, it needs to be agreed by LegCo.

Now, in the House of Keys, Chris Thomas warned this amendment could create extra work and may delay the legislation. We await Attorney General John Quinn’s response, but can be confident it’ll be more than a dismissive shrug and a muttered ’whatevs . . . ’

Last and probably not least, the Income Tax Legislation (Amendment) Bill, giving a permanent footing to some temporary measures, is due to have its third and final reading in the LegCo.