Snatch vehicle deaths ghastly, admits MoD chief

The deaths of British troops travelling in lightly-armoured Snatch Land Rovers are "ghastly", the Ministry of Defence's top civil servant said today.

But Sir Bill Jeffrey insisted there was no "silver bullet solution" that would have allowed military chiefs to replace the controversial vehicle earlier.

Giving evidence to the Iraq Inquiry, he also admitted the defence budget was so stretched that cuts had to be made over successive years.

Families of troops killed in Snatch Land Rovers blown up by roadside bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan have repeatedly argued that the vehicles were not fit for purpose.

Sir Bill, who has been Permanent Secretary at the MoD since November 2005, said: "The fundamental problem is that for some purposes military commanders will always argue that a highly mobile, lightweight vehicle of that sort is important and indeed operationally critical in some cases...

"That is little comfort to those who lost loved ones in Snatch Land Rovers. It is ghastly. I feel that very strongly.

"On the other hand, what there was not over that period was a silver bullet solution in which a better-protected version of Snatch could have been bought very quickly."

He admitted that the military started the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with "an outdated stock of armoured vehicles", but said the situation had improved.

Officials travelling with Prime Minister Gordon Brown in Afghanistan at the weekend said an announcement on 200 new armoured vehicles to replace Snatch Land Rovers was expected within weeks.

But the Conservatives pointed out the original contract notice was for "up to 400" vehicles and accused the Government of cutting the number it was acquiring by half.

Explaining this apparent discrepancy, Sir Bill said: "The reason the Prime Minister's announcement was confined to these 200 was because we are able to acquire these through an urgent operational requirement as a call on the reserve.

"It certainly does not mean that they won't acquire more."

Sir Bill was asked about the evidence of his predecessor, Sir Kevin Tebbit, that he had to run a "crisis budget" when he was at the MoD.

He told the inquiry: "The upwards pressures to which I have referred have meant that in successive years over my time, our ministers and we have had to think hard about what we could cut...

"Whether that constitutes a crisis, I don't know.

"On one level, it's the business that all Government departments have to do when resources are tight. But it certainly felt more than quite tight over the last period."

Sir Bill said significant pressure was put on the armed forces when Britain sent troops to Helmand Province in southern Afghanistan in 2006 while maintaining a large deployment in Iraq.

"There was some apprehension that if we ended up being involved in Iraq for longer than we were then assuming, then we would become very stretched indeed, as proved to be the case," he said.

"Being involved in both theatres undoubtedly constrained how much we could contribute to either of them."