The South Uist priest who fought a nuclear rockets range

Seventy years ago, in the early years of the Cold War, East and West were locked in a nuclear arms race.The UK government needed somewhere to test its first rockets capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.It picked South Uist, a Hebridean island of a few thousand inhabitants on Scotland's rugged Atlantic coast.What the government did not expect was resistance from within the community led by a Catholic priest, Fr John Morrison.
What was the Cold War?
Kate MacDonald, was a girl growing up in West Gerinish, South Uist, in the 1950s and remembers keenly the furore around the rocket range."When they started firing the rockets they used to go wrong and fall in the sand behind our house with a big bang," she says."People were upset in the beginning."Then they just accepted it because it was bringing jobs."
Fr Morrison, a parish priest, had initially supported the rocket project for that very same reason.In 1955, when the UK government first announced it planned to open the guided missile testing site, the economy was still recovering after the end of World War Two 10 years earlier.Jobs were hard to find and in South Uist people earned a living from small farms called crofts.They supplemented their income by weaving tweed or harvesting seaweed.
The Conservative UK government of the time was under pressure from the US and other allies in the West to help create a nuclear deterrent against Russia and the wider Eastern Bloc.It needed a location for training troops in the live firing of rockets - minus their deadly payload.A number of sites were considered, including Shetland and north east Scotland's Moray Firth.The government went for South Uist.It was home to 2,000 people and was described as an island with more water than land due large number of lochs, according to a debate in the House of Lords.On one side of the island was the vast expanse of the North Atlantic where, the government hoped, misfiring rockets could safely crash land.Landowner Herman Andreae claimed he was given little choice but to sell his land on his South Uist Estate to the Ministry of Defence.
The huge scale of the military scheme soon revealed itself. Crofters were to be evicted to make way for thousands of military personnel and their families.Fr Morrison was horrified. He feared a way of life was at risk of being lost.Many islanders were deeply religious with Catholic the dominant faith, and for most of them Gaelic was their first language rather than English."You were talking about the removal of basically all the crofters from Sollas in the north to Bornais in the south," says Fr Michael MacDonald, a priest who looks after Fr Morrison's parish today.The distance between the two locations is more than 30 miles."This was draconian stuff," Fr MacDonald adds."A huge village was to be planted in there."I think he felt the faith would be swamped. That the Gaelic culture would be swamped."
Fr Morrison spoke out publicly against the rocket base.Not everyone in South Uist supported his view, but Fr Morrison attracted local and national press attention.Journalists dubbed him Father Rocket.His headline-grabbing comments included his suggestion he and his parishioners would leave South Uist in protest and move to Canada.Historian Neil Bruce said: "Newspapers in the US were carrying stories about the rocket range and these doughty locals who were standing up to what the government wanted to do."People from outside the islands threw their support behind him. They included anti-nuclear campaigners, conservationists and academics.There was a spin-off benefit for Fr Morrison.Since 1952 he had been working on plans for a statue called Our Lady of the Isles, dedicated to the Virgin Mary.Mr Bruce says publicity around the rockets row made it easier to raise the funds needed for the work of art.It was unveiled in 1958 and some saw it as a symbol of opposition to the weapons facility.
The rocket range did go ahead, although on a smaller scale than planned due to cost savings.But Mr Bruce says Fr Morrison's campaign should be credited for achieving important concessions.They included an assurance that common grazings - land shared by crofters to raise livestock - would not be used and access remained available to some other areas rent-free.The historian believes local road improvements were in part thanks to the priest.And a promise was secured that only essential maintenance would take place on the range on the Sabbath.Mr Bruce says: "On balance, there was a very strong local view that he won at the time."Whether that holds today is for others to say not me."Fr Morrison died in 1992.
The range remains operational and is a significant local employer today.Islanders fought against a proposed closure of the site, before the MoD announced it was "safe" about 14 years ago.It has been used for training in anti-aircraft weapons and military drones.In 2015, the facility played a part in the launch of the UK's first rocket into space.Part of Fr Morrison's legacy is the Our Lady of the Isles statue.It shares a hilltop with a radar station for the range.Fr MacDonald says: "When you pass there, particularly at night-time when the statue is floodlit and you see the radar domes and the aviation warning lights, it's striking the juxtaposition of these two symbols of the nuclear age."

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mirror

19 hours ago

• Daily Mirror

Nuclear troops given unnecessary x-rays in Britain's first atomic bomb test

A hidden document has revealed that troops were given unnecessary x-rays on their way to take part in Britain's first atomic bomb test in the 1950s Troops were given potentially harmful x-rays in a secret biological monitoring programme as part of Cold War weapons tests. Hundreds of Royal Engineers were ordered to submit to the medical examinations without any clinical reason or benefit. The evidence has emerged from a medical officer's journal, hidden for decades at the Atomic Weapons Establishment behind top secret security classifications. Thousands of servicemen were subject to similar orders as Britain developed its nuclear arsenal over the decade that followed. ‌ Pam Hill, whose dad Jim Stephenson took part in Operation Hurricane in 1952, said: 'He was sent to do his duty and he did it. Afterwards he had serious gut problems, and 40 years of a severe lung disease which eventually killed him. Seven months are missing from his medical records. It was always on his mind that the whole lung thing was caused by being out at Montebello. If he had chest x-rays at the time, it might have answered all our questions.' ‌ Jim's lung condition, bronchiectasis, can be caused by radiation. His children have also suffered unexplained illness, with miscarriages, coeliac disease, and spinal issues. His teenaged grandson has almost no adult teeth. While the cancer risk of an x-ray is small, it increases if done repeatedly. It can be justified only if there is a therapeutic benefit - and for healthy troops already examined and found to be A1-fit, there was none. The Mirror 's three-year investigation of the Nuked Blood Scandal has already uncovered thousands of blood and urine tests given to troops, with the results withheld from their medical records. Now we can reveal there was a third and potentially-harmful form of monitoring, using x-rays. If men had damage as a result of inhaling radioactive particles, it could show up as dark shadows on their lungs. What happened to healthy people living amid fallout was unknown, but since 1947 human experiments have needed informed consent, full communication of the risks involved, and the right to withdraw. A consultant radiologist told the Mirror: 'There was a clear understanding at the time that radiation caused tumours. From a military standpoint you'd probably get ethical approval because it's an unknown and there were civil defence concerns. You would want to know what proportion later developed a problem, what the damage was, whether it rectified itself or led to longer term damage. There would always be a duty of care to the patients. 'To not keep those records long-term would be considered a massive breach of research protocol. There would be redress, and punitive fines. Perhaps more importantly for the veterans, someone would have looked at all these x-rays and made an assessment, written a report on the outcomes. Where is that now?' ‌ READ MORE: Video emerges of Defence Secretary saying nuke veterans scandal "shames us as a country" The medical journal covers the weeks shortly before Operation Hurricane in 1952, Britain's first nuclear bomb test, which detonated in the hull of an old warship off the Montebello Islands in Australia. Just over 200 Royal Engineers were ordered to join the fleet, to build jetties, camps and laboratories near Ground Zero. The journal states: 'They came aboard only a few hours before we sailed, and I did not discover until after that it is not a routine in the army to have the chest x-rayed at yearly intervals. Accordingly I had them all done at Royal Naval Hospital Malta.' ‌ The log was discovered on a top secret database at the Atomic Weapons Establishment, locked on the grounds of national security risks. Labour ministers have ordered the entire archive to be published, but have not commented on why it was a state secret, or why it is not one any more. The Ministry of Defence has spent decades denying it experimented on troops. Few survive from that first operation, and government studies have found they have increased risks of bladder, skin, stomach and 'unspecified' cancers. They also have elevated rates of suicide. ‌ Jim's former comrade, Dixie Kidd, 92, said: 'At one point after the bomb we were ordered on to shore to collect things the scientists had left behind, tins of food, raw vegetables. Others were picking up dead sea birds. After we left, I was in a contingent ordered to take readings from the things we had found, two hours on, two hours off. The numbers were to establish the radioactive half-life. 'On the way home, our pay books were taken off us and they put into each one we had been exposed to 5 rads of radiation. All of us the same. I wondered how that was possible, and why I never got ill when so many of my mates did.' Documents seen by the Mirror state that anyone with a dose over 5 rads could no longer be employed on the operation. A higher recorded dose may also have led to war pensions. ‌ Another ex-sapper, Eric Waterfield, from 71 Field Squadron, has seen his daughters suffer reproductive issues. He said: 'Three years after Hurricane, a surgeon found a growth in my lung. He said it was better in the bucket than in my chest, so he had it out, and that was the last I heard of it. If there were chest x-rays, it might explain things.' The bogus classification of information about the experiments is now the subject of a criminal complaint to the Met Police, which is considering further action. The missing medical records are being sought in a civil suit estimated to cost the MoD up to £5bn in aggravated damages. ‌ Campaign group LABRATS has asked the Prime Minister for a meeting to find a cheaper, quicker route to truth and justice, but has received no reply. Founder Alan Owen said: 'This biological monitoring was done to see what would happen to the British civilian population if attacked. Troops were the only people who could be ordered into fallout and told to stay there, under threat of a court martial. 'We have found veteran after veteran has medical records that are missing this vital data. Without it, medical diagnosis and treatment are harder and war pensions next to impossible. 'All we want is for the most mistreated veterans in British history to get a fair deal - to be heard, to get justice, and to get an apology.' A spokesman for the MoD said: 'The Minister for Veterans and People has commissioned officials to look into unresolved questions regarding medical records as a priority, and this is now underway. This work will enable us to better understand what information the department holds regarding medical testing of service personnel.'

The National

a day ago

• The National

Why must we sow division between our native languages?

The Scots and Gaelic leids are now official languages of Scotland as of the Scottish Languages Bill passed on that day. The opinion piece says the focus is primarily on Gaelic, which is principally true, but ignores the fact that a lot of the bill in that instance is in reference to making amendments to the Gaelic Language Act 2005 which saw the establishment of Bòrd na Gàidhlig but failed to go as far as recognising Gaelic as an official language. Whereas the Scots leid has never had a significant piece of legislation until this one. There is then reference to a 'funding disparity' between Gaelic and Scots which is true, Gaelic receiving £28 million and Scots half a million. The article then goes on to reference the level of understanding of each language as according to the 2022 census: Scots 'a whopping 2.4 million' and Gaelic '136,000' people. This figure is incorrect and the number of people with an understanding of Gaelic is 130,161. In this moment there is a sense that because Scots has more speakers than Gaelic, it deserves more funding than Gaelic. But the reason why Gaelic has so much financial aid is just because of how precarious of a state it is in. Scots is far more likely to be heard on mainstream Scottish media than Gaelic, and 2.4 million speakers is exactly why it can endure less funding while Gaelic can't. There is a reason why people are so passionate about this minoritised language; Gaelic is Scotland's oldest living language. Here since 400AD, it contains words and phrasings used by the Picts and the ancient Norse who first came to these shores. It carries the memories of this nation from its very beginnings as a nation. The fact that there are any speakers at all after the centuries of oppression it has endured and the realities of bigger all-consuming languages denying it much breathing space is quite frankly miraculous and a credit to its worth. It is also of note that there are 1.5 million learners using the Scottish Gaelic Duolingo course if the number of people in a linguistic community is all that matters here. This is not in any way to somehow demean or devalue the Scots leid or the fact that it does indeed require more funding and deserves additional support. I do not want this to be an issue between our linguistic communities or source of division. I am writing this response in fear that this opinion piece comes very close to causing just that form of division – it reads as though the two languages must compete for survival. 'Even in the Government's overview of the bill, the focus remains on Gaelic, which is notably placed above Scots even in order.' I cannot believe that the order of which the languages are discussed in this bill is all that significant. And again, the focus on this bill being on Gaelic is primarily from adjusting existing legislation to the new realities of just how much assistance Gaelic linguistic communities really need. Apparently talk of road signs in Scots has been met with horror online '… despite Gaelic road signage being commonplace in Scotland'. This bit is quite frankly laughable. What purpose the 'despite' has there is beyond me as Gaelic road signage still faces constant criticism, insulting remarks and even vandalism. Gaelic road signage is also found only in areas where councils have supported such measures but there are plenty of places in Scotland in which Gaelic signage is non-existent. The fact that the Highland Council has 'bilingual signage' in places with Gaelic names where the English name is just a bad pronunciation guide is ridiculous. A great example of a redundant 'translation' being Rearaig to Reraig. The campaign for Scots road signs will have to just get used to online trolls as the Gaelic one has. I understand that, as the author puts it herself, she is 'critical of the Government's public focus on Gaelic', not Gaelic itself, but really, I see no reason why it should be viewed in such terms. The inclusion of Gaelic legislation does not detract from the Scots component in this bill, its official status and the leid being taught as a National 5 and Higher subject. An argument for more support and more funding for Scots, which it requires, could have been made without taking against the 'lauding of Gaelic' – a language which still can't be mentioned online without insidious and derogatory remarks being made towards it in the comments section. I understand the frustration felt by Scots speakers when the leid is dismissed as slang or bad English because it is the same frustration I feel when Gaelic is referred to as a dead language or a foreign language. This bill is a step in the right direction for our linguistic communities and provides the foundation for more to be done. So let our speaking communities, Gaelic and Scots, support each other's efforts instead of quibbling over which is more in the spotlight. Calli MacCeiteach Rearaig LOSING the recent by-election is seen by many Scots not so much, as unexpected, but more in despair. It seems so obvious – our FM should have been shouting 'Independence' from the roof tops. But he barely mentioned it. We are trying to find answers. Our Party SNP has been elected for so many decades to do two things – govern our Nation, and at the same time, get a divorce from the Union. This is a task that no other Nation in the World has to deal with. It appears that this is too difficult a task to do both at the same time. John Swinney is clearly a fine and administrator; a decent man but hardly a freedom fighter. And as many now feel, as clearly demonstrated in your 'letter' pages, he is unable to fit Scotland's withdrawal from the Union into his planning … or so it seems. Perhaps he is going to hold his fire until he sees the whites of their eyes, and close to the Election date, throw some magic dust on us to get the big majority he has promised. Few believe that. Our increasing percentage of pensioners, coupled with a low birth-rate asks us where the future taxes are coming from. If we cannot imagine incentivising an increase in birth-rate, our future will depend on our planning to make migration a real economic opportunity for the whole Nation. For this to happen, we will have to plan now for the long term, for jobs, homes, infrastructure such as tunnel/ bridge/ causeway connections to all our Islands and Ireland, plenty, inexpensive energy, and inward investment in finance, know-how and international contacts. Hundreds of thousands of jobs will be created: our young men and women will be less inclined to emigrate, schools will fill up again, our rural communities will get better connectivity, more and better jobs, and the conservation of their local culture, languages, arts, and their environment. Our young citizens are disenchanted, have scant respect for our elected politicians, don't read the papers or watch TV, and no-one is talking to them on what they want for their future. Their major interest is in the climate change paradigm and are exasperated at the inability of the Nations of this World to meet the targets each have signed up for. They, according to the polls, are huge Independence supporters, but largely have not even registered to vote, far less vote itself. None of our present politicians measure up. To get our independence we must detail what the future is probably going to look like and get that vote. Our government talks of the past, its record on such as improving child poverty and NHS waiting lists, but very little on what the future will be. Our 'successes' are compared to those of England's – a nation ten times our size and a complete irrelevance. How would our present 'successes' compare with those of Scotland's neighbouring Scandinavian Nations, or Estonia, Singapore – all similarly-populated Nations? That, I suggest, are more meaningful data bases against which to measure our success. These are the levels of economic success, health, and wellbeing that our young citizens will want to reach. Planning for a Nation's future, exciting enough to intellectually interest and involve our younger population, is not a 5-year parliamentary term exercise. Aberdeen's AWPR (outer ring road) took 60 years to materialise, and although that may have been an exception, the planning, designing, financing, and building Scotland's immediate needs for the future will take many decades to complete, and must start now. This planning must start at community level, (the stakeholders), approved and professionally developed, with the Government in an audit and banking role. As a now retired urban planner-cum-developer who has worked in over a dozen 'developing' countries, I am impressed with the future planning being carried out in so many countries today: every Nation different, with totally dissimilar political regimes, but things are moving apace; they know where they are going. Scotland has all the resources to catch up but it needs to be independent to be other than a resource base for our neighbours. Lesley Riddoch is covering brilliantly the thinking and successes of the Scandinavian nations and then there are other countries with similar populations to Scotland such as Singapore, New Zealand, Estonia all the way up to China that are showing impressive progress over so many development and environmental fields over the last couple of decades, taking them forward to predicable economically viable and happy futures. In the apolitical talks I give to differing groups around the Northeast on 'Scotland's Future Through to 2100', there has been considerable interest in this unexplored potential. With inexpensive, environmentally friendly energy, huge seas, land ownership and use being reviewed, a well-educated population, success in terms of health, prosperity and wellbeing can be very doable, believable. As things stand, politicians must use their platforms to highlight the huge progress that is within the Nation's grasp. Where are the orators who must tell the story to our people, especially to our young citizens, asking them to put down their phones, register to vote, and get to the voting booths next year? It is their future that this election is all about – through to the next exciting 75 years to 2100, their time. not just another 'steady as you go' 5-year term. Scotland's young need a dream! Gordon G Benton Newburgh, Aberdeenshire

The Guardian

a day ago

• The Guardian

Thousands of UK government laptops, phones and tablets have been lost or stolen

Thousands of UK government laptops, phones and tablets worth more than £1m have been either lost or stolen, freedom of information disclosures have revealed, triggering warnings of a 'systemic risk' to the nation's cybersecurity. The Department for Work and Pensions recorded 240 missing laptops and 125 missing phones in 2024; while in the first five months of this year the Ministry of Defence recorded 103 missing laptops and 387 missing phones. The Cabinet Office, which coordinates government activity, lost or had stolen 66 laptops and 124 phones in 2024. The replacement cost of the more than 2,000 missing devices recorded across 18 Whitehall departments and public authorities in the last year for which figures are available is running at about £1.3m annually, according to Guardian analysis of freedom of information responses. The Bank of England, HM Treasury and the Home Office were among other departments where dozens of phones and laptops went missing. Cybersecurity experts said the losses could enable hackers to create backdoors into government systems even if large parts of the hardware were encrypted. One called it 'a huge national security risk', but the government downplayed the danger, saying that encryption prevented access to bad actors. 'These are surprisingly large numbers,' said Prof Alan Woodward, a cybersecurity expert at the University of Surrey. 'When you are talking about so many [it creates] a large attack surface [for hackers]. If 1% were system administrators who had their phones stolen, that's enough to get in.' He said that if devices were open when stolen, as frequently happens with phones snatched on the street, criminals could keep them open and 'drill down into the device and once the phone is open, by design it is readable and accessible'. The Ministry of Defence said it had robust policies and procedures to prevent losses and thefts. It said: 'Encryption on devices ensures any data is safeguarded and prevents access to the defence network.' The Bank of England said it 'takes the security of devices and data very seriously and has suitable protection in place'. A government spokesperson said: 'We take the security of government devices extremely seriously, which is why items such as laptops and mobile phones are always encrypted so any loss does not compromise security.' It added that every loss or theft was investigated. 'The device loss seems quite high,' said Nick Jackson, the chief information security officer at Bitdefender, a cybersecurity firm. 'It only takes one lost [device] to compromise a network. It poses a systemic risk and is something that could potentially be taken more seriously especially given the access and connections that department will have.' Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion He said laptops were likely to have encryption, but tablets or phones presented a greater risk. Jackson said: 'The biggest risk is that the devices themselves will have access to sensitive information and authentication tokens. If someone was able to gain access to those they would be able complete authentication processes on any government application or government website that they shouldn't be able to access.' The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, which is responsible for cybersecurity, recorded 83 phones and 18 laptops lost or stolen in the year to May 2025. In 2024, the Home Office, which oversees policing, had 147 devices go missing at an estimated replacement cost of more than £85,000. An MoD spokesperson said: 'We treat all breaches of security very seriously and we require all suspected breaches to be reported. All incidents are subjected to an initial security risk assessment, with further action taken on a proportionate basis.' David Gee, the chief marketing officer of Cellebrite, a digital forensics and cybersecurity firm that works with the Metropolitan police, said: 'Missing devices pose a huge national security risk, especially coming from public sector departments where they hold vast amounts of sensitive data. From healthcare departments to defence, staff phones and laptops must be protected at all costs, and keeping data safe in these government agencies should be a top priority.'