This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
According to the House of Commons Library reference, cited in the article, the Road Fund as set up under the 1920 act:
"...received the money derived from the taxation of motor vehicles that was collected by county councils and it paid it back to local authorities to finance expenditure incurred on roads."
It doesn't specifically state that the LAs couldn't use it for maintenance. How does Plowden describe it? -- de Facto ( talk). 23:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Although the term "Road Fund Licence" ceased to be the legal term for the thing many decades ago, it is still, rather amazingly, in use today in certain formal contexts such as in news, car leasing T&Cs and car promotions (e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]), so to say it is only in colloquial use today understates the actual use of the term. I thus removed "colloquial" in this edit. However, I was almost immediately reverted by User:JzG. Can we please discuss whether it is strictly true to call that use "colloquial". -- de Facto ( talk). 21:04, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
According to the House of Commons Library reference, cited in the article, the Road Fund as set up under the 1920 act:
"...received the money derived from the taxation of motor vehicles that was collected by county councils and it paid it back to local authorities to finance expenditure incurred on roads."
It doesn't specifically state that the LAs couldn't use it for maintenance. How does Plowden describe it? -- de Facto ( talk). 23:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Although the term "Road Fund Licence" ceased to be the legal term for the thing many decades ago, it is still, rather amazingly, in use today in certain formal contexts such as in news, car leasing T&Cs and car promotions (e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]), so to say it is only in colloquial use today understates the actual use of the term. I thus removed "colloquial" in this edit. However, I was almost immediately reverted by User:JzG. Can we please discuss whether it is strictly true to call that use "colloquial". -- de Facto ( talk). 21:04, 26 August 2016 (UTC)