Marshall Plan Aid for Australia?

Whilst not actually a part of the plan, it simply makes for a useful shorthand, the US did make a number of grants and loans to countries outside Europe in the Middle East and Asia. Australia didn't suffer any great damage domestically during WWII but it did spend a lot of money funding their contributions to the conflict, suffer casualties, and see parts of its infrastructure run down; yet whilst India and Pakistan received nearly US $1.15 billion, and Spain eventually received much smaller sums, Australia seems to have been missed out. Now it could be argued that being a developed economy it didn't need as much help as others, or perhaps they received support via other means, but I was curious what people thought the Australian government might have spent the money on if they had been included in the schemes?
 
Maybe a nuclear reactor, railway to Darwin on accelerated Snowy.

It's interesting to note that despite taking little damage, Australia did overmobilise and put too many men into uniform in WW2 putting the economy out of balance.
 
Maybe a nuclear reactor, railway to Darwin on accelerated Snowy.

It's interesting to note that despite taking little damage, Australia did overmobilise and put too many men into uniform in WW2 putting the economy out of balance.

I would think any kind of war mobilizing is going to have some detrimental effects on a countries' economy. In hindsight I guess they did overmobilize. I bet it didn't seem that way at the time.

Perhaps some kind of preferential trade deal with the U.S. would help Australia's postwar economy.
 
Maybe a nuclear reactor, railway to Darwin, or accelerated Snowy.
I'd probably add locomotives and rollingstock, particularly in NSW and Qld and funding for upgrading and repairs from the heavy wartime traffic on the network would be of significant practical use.
Funny you mention the railway to Darwin but this thread actually came from my reading about Operation Phoenix, the plan by Victorian Railways to rehabilitate their existing infrastructure, build new, and purchase new engines and rolling stock in the 1950s. It ran into trouble due to deficits, trouble raising loans, and US dollar shortages. Even if it was tied loans–having to be spent on US goods–it could actually be a benefit as it would likely push them towards diesel locomotives.
 
Last edited:
...railway to Darwin...

I'd probably add locomotives and rollingstock, particularly in NSW and Qld and funding for upgrading and repairs from the heavy wartime traffic on the network would be of significant practical use.

The delivery of Sir Harold Clapps's Rail Gauge Standardisation Plan in its entirety would be useful, along with the ability to use US dollars sooner to buy the latest EMD, GE & ALCo diesel technology for construction under licence (as ITTL).

The important thing would be to avoid at all costs the Marshall Plan money going towards the Bradfield Scheme, the great Australian Zombie infrastructure project.
 
Last edited:
Or the delivery of Sir Harold Clapps's Rail Gauge Standardisation Plan in its entirety

Could it mean the expansion of broad gauge as standard? For anyone turning that into a TL, using more broad gauge would be more interesting than standard gauge - would have the benefit of putting more people into coaches.
 
Could it mean the expansion of broad gauge as standard? For anyone turning that into a TL, using more broad gauge would be more interesting than standard gauge - would have the benefit of putting more people into coaches.

Sadly for you, no. There was a decision made fairly early (in the late 1890s) that the uniform railway gauge in Australia would be the 'Stephenson' standard gauge rather than the 'Irish' broad gauge. This was on the basis of the costs of complete conversion of the national network to standard gauge were significantly cheaper than for broad gauge.

I also think you'll find the 'more people on broad gauge' is a misnomer, at least in an Australian context.
 
Last edited:
The delivery of Sir Harold Clapps's Rail Gauge Standardisation Plan in its entirety would be useful, along with the ability to use US dollars sooner to buy the latest EMD, GE & ALCo diesel technology for construction under licence (as ITTL).

The important thing would be to avoid at all costs the Marshall Plan money going towards the Bradfield Scheme, the great Australian Zombie infrastructure project.
Which would be interesting if that means English Electric never gets its foothold in some of the state networks (shame as I like EE), which means less exports for the UK...

I can see many parts of the plan getting done in this scenario, but there will be some long, bitter memories from the last time the Commonwealth tried to direct things, via Commonwealth Land Transport Board... but I think that parochialism will be overcome... eventually.
 
Whilst not actually a part of the plan, it simply makes for a useful shorthand, the US did make a number of grants and loans to countries outside Europe in the Middle East and Asia. Australia didn't suffer any great damage domestically during WWII but it did spend a lot of money funding their contributions to the conflict, suffer casualties, and see parts of its infrastructure run down; yet whilst India and Pakistan received nearly US $1.15 billion, and Spain eventually received much smaller sums, Australia seems to have been missed out. Now it could be argued that being a developed economy it didn't need as much help as others, or perhaps they received support via other means, but I was curious what people thought the Australian government might have spent the money on if they had been included in the schemes?


Well... Australia sent more reciprocal lend lease to the US than the US sent lend lease to Australia. A Marshal plan could be a hard sell...
 
God Yes! If there ever was a scheme to ruin the country this is it.

Agreed.

As an aside, for those who are interested in reading more about the Bradfield Scheme, a history up to and including the 2007 resurrection of the 'Zombie Infrastructure' dream of irrigating Australia's arid interior is in Chapter 7 of Australia Under Construction.

For an alternate history take on the Bradfield Scheme (the POD is the money from the World Bank loan to Australia brokered by the US was spent on the Bradfield Scheme rather than the Snowy Mountains Scheme) is was in Scalmer & McIntyre's What If? Australian History as it might have been (2006).
 
Some other ideas for the use of Marshall Plan cash in Australia might include:
  • Grants to the States in the late 1940s for their major integrated energy supply schemes in the Blue Mountains (NSW), Latrobe Valley (Vic) and Spencer Gulf (SA) that would bring forward those projects (and presumably rail electrification from Sydney - Lithgow and Melbourne - Traralgon) by around a decade.
  • Greater investment in public housing through the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement (1945) making more loan funds available to the state housing agencies
  • Grants to upgrade and extend urban infrastructure networks (water, sewerage, electricity, gas) to deal with population growth and urban expansion
Not an exhaustive list, but just a few thoughts off the top of my head.
 
Top