Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The Snowy Vision

By Lance Endersbee - posted Saturday, 15 April 2000


Another remarkable contribution was by O T Olsen, an officer of the State Electricity Commission of Victoria, who had carried out the investigations for the Kiewa hydro-electric project in Victoria, and had studied the potential of the Snowy River from the mountains in NSW to the sea in Victoria. It was Olsen who proposed the diversion of the Upper Snowy River to the Murray River for power production and irrigation along the Murray River. (The development of the significant hydro-electric potential of the Lower Snowy River still awaits its place in time.)

These two concepts came together in the detailed studies by Rowntree, leading to an overall concept that met the objectives of a plan for the nation as a whole. The final reports were presented to the Commonwealth and State Committee, and then to the Premiers' Conference. The next task was to build the project, in circumstances that would be alive with prospects for continued rivalry and procrastination by state governments.

Much of the credit for establishing the Snowy Authority should go to Nelson Lemmon. He was the Minister for Works and Housing in the Australian Government of Prime Minister Ben Chifley. A Western Australian, he was determined that the national interest would prevail, but understood that the Australian Constitution of 1900 did not assign any powers to the Commonwealth to build a project like the Snowy Scheme. The key objectives of the Snowy were to develop electricity and water resources, and these activities remained as residual powers of state governments.

Advertisement

Here is Lemmon's account of what, I believe, is one of the most decisive moments in Australian history:

I went to Chifley...and I said, "There's only one way to handle this...Put the whole thing under the Defence Act ... and we'll be the boss." He said, "WHAT? Your name's Nelson Lemmon, not Ned Kelly - you can't do that?" So I said, "Why can't I?" "Well, he said, you tell me how you can!" So I said, "Listen! You had subs in the Harbour. The way we're building everything now, all they want is a decent cruiser and they could sneak through the guard and they could blow all your power stations out without an effort! You've got Bunnerong built on the water, you've got the big one at Wollongong built on the water ... they could blow all your damned electricity out in one night's shooting! Where'll you produce the arms, where'll your production be with all the power of New South Wales buggered?" Chif says, "You might get away with it ... If you can get Evatt to agree with it - and if there's a case he'll have to fight it in the High Court - if you can get Evatt to agree, I'll go all the way with you!"

Lemmon went to see Evatt. He knew that Evatt did not like Dedman, who was the Minister for Defence and Minister for Post-War Reconstruction. They were rivals. Lemmon told Evatt that Dedman had said they could not use the Defence Act. Evatt's support of Lemmon was immediate. Lemmon had his constitutional defender.

At the Premier's conference, Prime Minister Chifley advised the Premiers that the Commonwealth would proceed with the Scheme under the Defence powers. The Premiers were taken by surprise by this decision and simply noted the matter. They then proceeded to the next business.

It was an immense gamble, but there was no other way. Lemmon was aware that the Commonwealth did not even have the power to compulsorily acquire land for the project, as that was a state function. The Commonwealth did not have powers over diversion and use of water resources.

Chifley and Lemmon decided to move quickly towards construction to offset any possible legal challenges from the state governments, especially NSW. For this reason the Snowy Act of 1949 concentrated on the hydro-electric aspect of the Scheme, but not the diversion of water inland for irrigation. The costs of the project were to be recovered from power charges, with the additional water for irrigation being provided at no cost to the benefiting states of NSW, Victoria and SA.

Advertisement

These considerations of residual state rights for public works, under the Constitution, have meant that the Snowy Scheme remains the only national public infrastructure project in the history of our nation.

The project only became possible through the leadership of two groups of outstanding people. It was the engineering experts under Dr L F Loder who developed the vision of a national project. It was the political leaders, Prime Minister Chifley and Minister Lemmon, who believed that the merits of the grand design outweighed all objections on legal and constitutional grounds, and courageously began the Scheme.

The Leader of the Opposition in the Commonwealth Parliament was Robert Menzies. He formally opposed the proposals of the Government. But he privately congratulated Lemmon after the passage of the Snowy Act. Shortly thereafter there was a change of government, and Robert Menzies became Prime Minister. He accepted the decision of Parliament to proceed with the enterprise, supported the Snowy Authority, and ably dealt with the constitutional issues that continued to arise as the work proceeded. Menzies ensured the continued flow of funds to meet the needs of the project.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

This is an edited extract from a paper published by The Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Emeritus Professor Endersbee AO FTSE is a civil engineer of long experience in water resources development. His early professional career included service with the Snowy Mountains Hydro-Electric Authority, the Hydro-Electric Commission of Tasmania and the United Nations in South-East Asia as an expert on dam design and hydro power development. In 1976 he was appointed Dean of the Faculty of Engineering at Monash University. In 1988-89 he was Pro-Vice Chancellor of the University.

His fields of specialisation include the management of planning and design of major economic development projects, water resources, energy engineering and transport engineering. He has been associated with the design and construction of several large dams and underground power station projects and other major works in civil engineering and mining in Australia, Canada, Asia and Africa. He was President of the Institution of Engineers, Australia in 1980-81.

In 2005 he published, A Voyage of Discovery, a history of ideas about the earth, with a new understanding of the global resources of water and petroleum, and the problems of climate change.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Lance Endersbee
Photo of Lance Endersbee
Article Tools
Comment Comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy