AFTER two decades of investigation, argument, inaction and procrastination the States is to get a 16th opportunity to debate what to do with the island’s waste.

A requete submitted by Deputy Jan Kuttelwascher could yet scupper plans for a £93m. incinerator that had seemed all but unstoppable back in July. If successful, debate number 17 will be on the cards when Public Services comes back to the Assembly before signing the contract.

At least some of the 32 deputies who backed the incinerator are changing their view. Four of the seven signatories on the requete originally voted in favour of the burner.

However, those 5,000 islanders who have signed a petition against the energy-from-waste plant should note that the bare minimum seven deputies have signed the requete. That could be a matter of expediency but is often interpreted as weakness.

Regardless, many more deputies will be required to speak up strongly before expectations of the requete’s success can move from ‘highly unlikely’ to ‘possible’.

As it is, 10 deputies need to change their vote to bring the numbers level while those who were opposed to the burner must remain implacably so.

The pressure on all concerned is considerable. Public Services has put members on notice that the minimum cost of an abandoned process is £3.2m. – £800,000 more than the sum that provoked Fallagate.

And that could rise considerably if the deadline for signing the contract expires and Suez gets the chance to increase its bill.

Opponents of the incinerator will argue that such figures are chicken feed compared with the initial and ongoing costs of the proposed waste-to-energy plant.

Which is why the Brouard alternative suddenly seems so tempting. That way the island pays nothing and there is money left over for charities.

A new mysterious third alternative is now on the horizon. Whether that will help matters is not clear. Deputies are already overwhelmed with reports on this subject – another variable may only serve to inflame an already heated situation.