Talk:Road Fund

Was the fund only to be used for new roads?
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)

Colloquial?
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., , , , ), 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)
 * The formal term is, as I am certain you know, vehicle excise duty. Any other usage is colloquial (or simply ignorant). My father used to make the same error, but he corrected it in the mid 1970s. Guy (Help!) 21:08, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know what the government/legal/official term is. However that does not imply that other terms which are in common usage must be denigrated as "colloquial". Colloquial means not used formally; yet this term is used formally (even if originally ignorantly) and so has become more than just colloquial. So I think "colloquial" is incorrect in this context. -- de Facto (talk). 21:16, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * There is regular formal use of "road fund licence", including HMRC publications. It is decidedly not "colloquial". Mauls (talk) 13:23, 28 January 2019 (UTC)