They fought the Taleban - but can't beat the scrapheap

THE government has admitted that soldiers serving in Afghanistan could be handed redundancy notices, despite assurances of job security.

The revelation in evidence to the Commons Defence Select Committee came as the Ministry of Defence admitted that it will now be pushing for more compulsory redundancies because not enough volunteers in the right areas have come forward.

The admissions from Lib Dem Armed Forces Minister Nick Harvey and Lieutenant General Sir Bill Rollo, deputy head of personnel in the MoD, have raised more questions on the impact of morale in the armed services of the government's swingeing cuts on numbers.

When the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) was unveiled in November last year Prime Minister David Cameron insisted that those serving in Afghanistan would not be among the 17,000 losing their jobs unless they volunteered for redundancy.

The "reassurance" was then repeated in March when Defence Secretary Liam Fox announced the details of the redundancies in the three services. In November, when the SDSR was unveiled, Dr Fox insisted that nobody "currently" serving in Afghanistan would be made redundant.

Then in March, when he announced the first details of the redundancies, he repeated his claim saying: "When compulsory redundancies are announced, they will not affect those in receipt of the operational allowance, those within six months of deploying or those on post-operational tour leave as I have repeatedly made clear in the House."

But in evidence to the Select Committee, which is conducting an inquiry into the SDSR, Mr Harvey admitted that those serving in Afghanistan as late as March this year when Dr Fox was on his feet making a statement apparently protecting their jobs could face compulsory redundancy in the first round of job losses in September.

• Analysis: Looming axe for those risking their lives is mental cruelty

This is because the operational allowance protection lasts for six months after personnel have returned.

The issue was raised during evidence by Labour Dunfermline and West Fife MP Thomas Docherty who asked for clarity for those serving in Afghanistan and Libya.

Mr Harvey said: "The critical word was 'current'.If the Secretary of State had meant now he would have used the word 'now'. "He (Dr Fox] used the word 'current' because of what he meant and he then went on at considerable length to explain of his usage literally of the word current was that any given point in time when any of these tranches of redundancies which are anticipated over the next couple of years are made nobody who at that time is currently serving or is in the work up to starting a tour of duty or is in the recuperation period after it, nobody in those circumstances current at time would be selected for redundancy."

The minister added: "Now I regret the fact that this seems to have been misunderstood."

In earlier questions, Sir Bill Rollo was pressed by Mr Docherty over the state of the efforts to find sufficient numbers willing to leave the Armed Forces in the first tranche of redundancies.

In total there are supposed to be 17,000 leaving the military with 11,000 of these as redundancies in the next few years, although the government wanted as many voluntary redundancies as possible.

However, yesterday Sir Bill said: "If the numbers of volunteers don't come forward then I'm afraid we will have to make more redundancies."

Sir Bill admitted that not enough of the right people had come forward and when asked by Mr Docherty whether he was now seeking more compulsory redundancies than planned to make up the 2,295 in the first tranche, the general said "yes".

Last week it was revealed that too many senior non-commissioned officers and company commanders, who the government wants to stay, have put in for redundancy because of concerns over the future of the military.

The revelations have led to accusations that the government's redundancy programme is now "in chaos" and that it has misled service personnel who until recently were risking their lives that their jobs were safe.

Mr Docherty said: "This will be a further blow to service morale as witnessed by the numbers of company commanders and senior NCOs who have made it clear they want to leave. The government needs to get a handle on this because clearly the redundancy programme is in chaos."

Labour shadow defence minister Kevan Jones said: "Liam Fox needs to be straight with those serving in Afghanistan and Libya. Any speculation of further compulsory redundancies is unfair when we are asking them to fight for this country and put their lives at risk."

Mr Jones also hit out at Mr Harvey's attempts to suggest that a misunderstanding of the word "currently" was at the heart of the problem. He said: "I don't think that those serving will be fooled by any clever use of language by the minister. The idea of sending somebody to fight for this country and being handed a redundancy notice is totally unacceptable. It is time for the government to come clean and be honest on this issue."However, the government has defended its record on dealing with service personnel with Mr Cameron coming under pressure on housing for former personnel from one of his own back-benchers, Scottish Tory MP Mark Menzies.

Mr Cameron said: "We have for the first time put the military covenant into law, which is important in ensuring that military personnel are not discriminated against."