Despite the ongoing cross-country lockdown that has shuttered businesses, schools, public services and even most provincial and territorial legislatures, Canada’s 338 federally elected MPs may soon have to abandon standard social distancing protocols in favour of a return to the cramped quarters of the Commons chamber.

REVISIT: LIVE BLOG: House of Commons reconvenes to pass wage subsidy bill

According the original omnibus motion to suspend proceedings, the House is automatically set to resume regular programming on April 20 unless the House leaders of all four recognized parties co-sign a written request to continue the current hiatus — either by setting a new date to restart the session or extending it until further notice.

As of right now, at least one opposition party has made it clear that they’re prepared to use their procedural veto power to force the House to reopen for business on Monday — unless, that is, the government is willing to give in to their demand for regular in-person sittings.

In a letter sent to Trudeau on Monday, Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer noted that his party “has been clear” that any agreement to postpone the recall “must include regular opportunities for myself and other opposition leaders to question you, as we would normally during Question Period,” as well as “regular opportunities for all [MPs] to question ministers n the House of Commons on all aspects of the government’s response to COVID-19.”

Could that include “virtual” meetings, which are already under active study by House officials, and which could be up and running within the next four weeks, as per House Speaker Anthony Rota?

Not as far as Scheer is concerned. His letter makes it clear that he doesn’t see remote sessions as a substitute for real-time, “in-person” cross-aisle debate, although he says his party “welcomes the addition” of such initiatives “to augment our regularly scheduled in-person meetings.”

Speaking with reporters on Tuesday, Scheer insisted that he didn’t want to put MPs — or Commons staff — at risk, but would only state that he was “confident” that they could assemble without risking triggering an outbreak in the precinct, or otherwise endangering public health.

He did, however, acknowledge that having “all 338 members” back in their seats is “not optimal,” and suggested that he’d be fine with a limited number of MPs, as has been the case during the two previous emergency sittings.

So, what happens next?

READ MORE: Parliament could be recalled during Easter weekend to pass wage subsidy bill

With a little less than a week to go before the scheduled return, there’s more than enough time for the two sides to find a away around the impasse, either by giving into Scheer’s demand for a return to in-person sittings or coming up with a compromise that would allow his party to agree to extend the suspension.

If, however, no deal can be reached, the House will reopen on Monday, most likely with a full contingent of MPs unless the parties were able to come to an informal agreement to restrict attendance. (Which, given this particular hypothetical scenario, seems unlikely.)

How long would it remain in session? Quite possibly until June 23, which is when the House is slated to rise for the summer.

There’s also the possibility of a second suspension, but that, too, would likely require unanimous consent, although in theory, it could also be handled via simple motion, which would only need a majority to pass.

As yet, there’s no indication that the other two opposition parties are as adamantly opposed to switching to virtual sittings for the duration of the pandemic, and if they were willing to vote for a motion laying out a new timetable for a return to regular House business, it might temper the charges of undemocratic conduct that would inevitably emerge from the Conservatives.

Finally, the prime minister could always exercise his prerogative to prorogue the House — which, aside from the pro forma approval of the governor-general, would allow him to unilaterally suspend all parliamentary business to a future date.

Such a move would be highly controversial — and deservedly so, really, given how loudly his party protested such tactics as practiced by their Conservative predecessors.

It would also pull the plug on any and all efforts to provide parliamentary accountability amid the pandemic, including those measures supported by the Liberals: committees would cease to exist for the duration, and recalling the House to pass emergency legislation would mean starting a new session, complete with a Speech from the Throne.

It would also make it look like Trudeau and his team were so averse to facing public scrutiny of their efforts to limit the spread of the pandemic that they’d shut down parliament to avoid it, which is very much not what the Liberals are hoping the ultimate takeaway from this political drama will be.

READ MORE: Process Nerd: Virtual House sittings could work — with a few tweaks to the program

If Process Nerd had to make a prediction, she’d put her money on a compromise that will allow most MPs to remain in their ridings while ensuring that Scheer and the rest of the opposition front bench are able to pose as many pointed questions to the prime minister as the reporters who assemble outside Rideau Cottage every morning.