The big question for Tynwald today (Tuesday) is not just what members will have to say about the government proposal to buy the Steam Packet but how much they will say.

Amid rumours that some MHKs have already been carpeted by the dissent-phobic Council of Ministers, for not saying the right things after last week’s sudden announcement, it is worth remembering that, last year, Tynwald spent all of six minutes and 20 seconds on public consideration of the Steam Packet’s offer over a new sea services agreement.

This time, the government only deemed it worthy of informing the public of its plans to buy the Steam Packet just seven days before Tynwald was due to vote, and only then after the plan was splashed all over the front page of the Isle of Man Examiner last week. It wasn’t on the original agenda for today’s Tynwald sitting.

There is serious disquiet about the lack of detail over the deal - and the £124 million price tag. There was a briefing for Tynwald members on Thursday and we are assured it’s a great deal for the island, but precious little else has been forthcoming for the lowly public.

Last year, after some had the temerity to criticise the lack of debate of the future of the island’s sea links, there was indignation that we could be so sceptical - and not just from within CoMin.

One year on, there may be some MHKs who have a little more feel for public perception to realise that, no matter how great this deal may or may not be, it comes across as rather arrogant to imagine the public would not like to know a little more about it.

The counter-argument of commercial sensitivity will be flagged up. But dodging scrutiny and attempting to rush through the deal fuels a suspicion that claims of an open and transparent government are a flag of convenience to be sailed under only when it suits.

The Steam Packet debate does threaten to overshadow everything else, which is a bit of a shame because there could be an entertaining locking of horns between the Council of Ministers and the environment and infrastructure policy review committee.

CoMin is not impressed with some of the conclusions and recommendations in its report about sewage treatment for the west.

It’s fair to say that consensus government is not as all-embracing as we were once led to believe.

Policy and Reform Minister Chris Thomas is due to give a statement on planning reform - hopefully the content will meet with the approval of Lawrie Hooper (LibVannin, Ramsey), who has been rather strident, of late, in his criticisms of the minister’s utterances.

The issue of a national telecoms strategy will also be on the agenda.

A prize goes to the first Tynwald member to grumble about interruptions to email supplies last week.

And the findings of a social affairs policy review committee investigation into the government’s handling of the centralisation of endoscopy services at Noble’s Hospital will be debated.

Kate Beecroft (LibVannin, Douglas South), who was health minister at the time of the endoscopy row but now has time to cause government problems from outside, has tabled a motion that would see Tynwald opposing the ’segregated status’ of St Thomas’ CE School and Scoill Vallajeelt, once they begin to co-exist at the Saddlestone site.

There’s also a raft standing orders committee recommendations - which occupy eight-and-a-half-pages of an original order paper of 18 pages - to be considered. Someone should table an amendment suggesting better use of hyperlinks.

The question paper covers a wide range, including immigration and work permits, the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service waiting list, prescription charges, age discrimination, the minimum wage, and historic buildings under threat.