Paying Road Fund dues was never a fee for using a road

"The Road Board, created by the Development and Road Improvements
Bill,
published in August 1909, gave grants from the fund to local
authorities to repair roads damaged by motorists. Even in the early
days of motoring, roads were mostly paid for by general and local
taxation. Paying Road Fund dues was never a fee for using a road, it
was a fee to be paid out to local authorities for the damage done to
roads by motorists. A Customs memo of 1908 said the “increased
taxation of motors…” would “aid in restoring local roads damaged by
motors licensed in other areas.”
Lloyd George said the Road Fund’s “first charge” was for improvements
after damage done by cars; “power to build new roads” was only
secondary."
(http://ipayroadtax.com/)

On 13/09/2011 09:43, Squashme wrote:

"The Road Board, created by the Development and Road Improvements
Bill, published in August 1909, gave grants from the fund to local
authorities to repair roads damaged by motorists. Even in the early
days of motoring, roads were mostly paid for by general and local
taxation. Paying Road Fund dues was never a fee for using a road,

....allegedly. Nevertheless, one was not and still is not allowed to use the
roads without paying that fee at whatever level it was or is set.

"May I use the roads with my motor vehicle?"

"Have you got a valid Road Tax disc on it?"

"No."

"In that case, the answer is NO."

What is said at that URL is a bit like claiming that the entrance fee to a
cinema or theatre isn't a charge for being able to watch the film or show.
Actually, in some hyper-pedantic sense, that would be more true than claiming
that Road Tax isn't a fee for use of the roads, since some might pay for
entrance, head straight for the bar and stay there.

On Sep 13, 9:50*am, JNugent wrote:
On 13/09/2011 09:43, Squashme wrote:

"The Road Board, created by the Development and Road Improvements
Bill, published in August 1909, gave grants from the fund to local
authorities to repair roads damaged by motorists. Even in the early
days of motoring, roads were mostly paid for by general and local
taxation. Paying Road Fund dues was never a fee for using a road,

...allegedly. Nevertheless, one was not and still is not allowed to use the
roads without paying that fee at whatever level it was or is set.

"May I use the roads with my motor vehicle?"

"Have you got a valid Road Tax disc on it?"

"No."

"In that case, the answer is NO."

What is said at that URL is a bit like claiming that the entrance fee to a
cinema or theatre *isn't a charge for being able to watch the film or show.
Actually, in some hyper-pedantic sense, that would be more true than claiming
that Road Tax isn't a fee for use of the roads, since some might pay for
entrance, head straight for the bar and stay there.

And some might jive in the aisles, let off fire extinguishers and
throw bottles at the screen, claiming a "right" to do it. They should
pay extra for their damage.
A party of vicars might well spread an aura of calm and peace amongst
the whole audience, and just drop the odd slice of cucumber on the
carpet. They might well be let in for free.

In case you didn't get it:-
Teds = motorists
Vicars = cyclists

On 13/09/2011 11:13, Squashme wrote:
On Sep 13, 9:50 am, wrote:
On 13/09/2011 09:43, Squashme wrote:

"The Road Board, created by the Development and Road Improvements
Bill, published in August 1909, gave grants from the fund to local
authorities to repair roads damaged by motorists. Even in the early
days of motoring, roads were mostly paid for by general and local
taxation. Paying Road Fund dues was never a fee for using a road,

...allegedly. Nevertheless, one was not and still is not allowed to use the
roads without paying that fee at whatever level it was or is set.

"May I use the roads with my motor vehicle?"

"Have you got a valid Road Tax disc on it?"

"No."

"In that case, the answer is NO."

What is said at that URL is a bit like claiming that the entrance fee to a
cinema or theatre isn't a charge for being able to watch the film or show.
Actually, in some hyper-pedantic sense, that would be more true than claiming
that Road Tax isn't a fee for use of the roads, since some might pay for
entrance, head straight for the bar and stay there.

And some might jive in the aisles, let off fire extinguishers and
throw bottles at the screen, claiming a "right" to do it. They should
pay extra for their damage.
A party of vicars might well spread an aura of calm and peace amongst
the whole audience, and just drop the odd slice of cucumber on the
carpet. They might well be let in for free.

But they aren't, are they?

On Sep 13, 11:29*am, JNugent wrote:
On 13/09/2011 11:13, Squashme wrote:









On Sep 13, 9:50 am, *wrote:
On 13/09/2011 09:43, Squashme wrote:

"The Road Board, created by the Development and Road Improvements
Bill, published in August 1909, gave grants from the fund to local
authorities to repair roads damaged by motorists. Even in the early
days of motoring, roads were mostly paid for by general and local
taxation. Paying Road Fund dues was never a fee for using a road,

...allegedly. Nevertheless, one was not and still is not allowed to use the
roads without paying that fee at whatever level it was or is set.

"May I use the roads with my motor vehicle?"

"Have you got a valid Road Tax disc on it?"

"No."

"In that case, the answer is NO."

What is said at that URL is a bit like claiming that the entrance fee to a
cinema or theatre *isn't a charge for being able to watch the film or show.
Actually, in some hyper-pedantic sense, that would be more true than claiming
that Road Tax isn't a fee for use of the roads, since some might pay for
entrance, head straight for the bar and stay there.

And some might jive in the aisles, let off fire extinguishers and
throw bottles at the screen, claiming a "right" to do it. They should
pay extra for their damage.
A party of vicars might well spread an aura of calm and peace amongst
the whole audience, and just drop the odd slice of cucumber on the
carpet. They might well be let in for free.

But they aren't, are they?

Yes, the gentle vicars do get to use the roads for free, unlike the
thuggish motorists.

On 13/09/2011 11:33, Squashme wrote:
On Sep 13, 11:29 am, wrote:
On 13/09/2011 11:13, Squashme wrote:









On Sep 13, 9:50 am, wrote:
On 13/09/2011 09:43, Squashme wrote:

"The Road Board, created by the Development and Road Improvements
Bill, published in August 1909, gave grants from the fund to local
authorities to repair roads damaged by motorists. Even in the early
days of motoring, roads were mostly paid for by general and local
taxation. Paying Road Fund dues was never a fee for using a road,

...allegedly. Nevertheless, one was not and still is not allowed to use the
roads without paying that fee at whatever level it was or is set.

"May I use the roads with my motor vehicle?"

"Have you got a valid Road Tax disc on it?"

"No."

"In that case, the answer is NO."

What is said at that URL is a bit like claiming that the entrance fee to a
cinema or theatre isn't a charge for being able to watch the film or show.
Actually, in some hyper-pedantic sense, that would be more true than claiming
that Road Tax isn't a fee for use of the roads, since some might pay for
entrance, head straight for the bar and stay there.

And some might jive in the aisles, let off fire extinguishers and
throw bottles at the screen, claiming a "right" to do it. They should
pay extra for their damage.
A party of vicars might well spread an aura of calm and peace amongst
the whole audience, and just drop the odd slice of cucumber on the
carpet. They might well be let in for free.

But they aren't, are they?

Yes, the gentle vicars do get to use the roads for free, unlike the
thuggish motorists.

Don't think so. The local vicar of this parish has to pay his Road Tax like
anyone else.

On Sep 13, 12:38*pm, JNugent wrote:
On 13/09/2011 11:33, Squashme wrote:









On Sep 13, 11:29 am, *wrote:
On 13/09/2011 11:13, Squashme wrote:

On Sep 13, 9:50 am, * *wrote:
On 13/09/2011 09:43, Squashme wrote:

"The Road Board, created by the Development and Road Improvements
Bill, published in August 1909, gave grants from the fund to local
authorities to repair roads damaged by motorists. Even in the early
days of motoring, roads were mostly paid for by general and local
taxation. Paying Road Fund dues was never a fee for using a road,

...allegedly. Nevertheless, one was not and still is not allowed to use the
roads without paying that fee at whatever level it was or is set.

"May I use the roads with my motor vehicle?"

"Have you got a valid Road Tax disc on it?"

"No."

"In that case, the answer is NO."

What is said at that URL is a bit like claiming that the entrance fee to a
cinema or theatre *isn't a charge for being able to watch the film or show.
Actually, in some hyper-pedantic sense, that would be more true than claiming
that Road Tax isn't a fee for use of the roads, since some might pay for
entrance, head straight for the bar and stay there.

And some might jive in the aisles, let off fire extinguishers and
throw bottles at the screen, claiming a "right" to do it. They should
pay extra for their damage.
A party of vicars might well spread an aura of calm and peace amongst
the whole audience, and just drop the odd slice of cucumber on the
carpet. They might well be let in for free.

But they aren't, are they?

Yes, the gentle vicars do get to use the roads for free, unlike the
thuggish motorists.

Don't think so. The local vicar of this parish has to pay his Road Tax like
anyone else.

As a non-motoring cyclist, he should refuse.

On 13/09/2011 13:00, Squashme wrote:
On Sep 13, 12:38 pm, wrote:
On 13/09/2011 11:33, Squashme wrote:









On Sep 13, 11:29 am, wrote:
On 13/09/2011 11:13, Squashme wrote:

On Sep 13, 9:50 am, wrote:
On 13/09/2011 09:43, Squashme wrote:

"The Road Board, created by the Development and Road Improvements
Bill, published in August 1909, gave grants from the fund to local
authorities to repair roads damaged by motorists. Even in the early
days of motoring, roads were mostly paid for by general and local
taxation. Paying Road Fund dues was never a fee for using a road,

...allegedly. Nevertheless, one was not and still is not allowed to use the
roads without paying that fee at whatever level it was or is set.

"May I use the roads with my motor vehicle?"

"Have you got a valid Road Tax disc on it?"

"No."

"In that case, the answer is NO."

What is said at that URL is a bit like claiming that the entrance fee to a
cinema or theatre isn't a charge for being able to watch the film or show.
Actually, in some hyper-pedantic sense, that would be more true than claiming
that Road Tax isn't a fee for use of the roads, since some might pay for
entrance, head straight for the bar and stay there.

And some might jive in the aisles, let off fire extinguishers and
throw bottles at the screen, claiming a "right" to do it. They should
pay extra for their damage.
A party of vicars might well spread an aura of calm and peace amongst
the whole audience, and just drop the odd slice of cucumber on the
carpet. They might well be let in for free.

But they aren't, are they?

Yes, the gentle vicars do get to use the roads for free, unlike the
thuggish motorists.

Don't think so. The local vicar of this parish has to pay his Road Tax like
anyone else.

As a non-motoring cyclist, he should refuse.

He might have a bike as well as the car, I suppose. Never seen a bike at the
vicarage though.

On Sep 13, 1:02*pm, JNugent wrote:
On 13/09/2011 13:00, Squashme wrote:









On Sep 13, 12:38 pm, *wrote:
On 13/09/2011 11:33, Squashme wrote:

On Sep 13, 11:29 am, * *wrote:
On 13/09/2011 11:13, Squashme wrote:

On Sep 13, 9:50 am, * * *wrote:
On 13/09/2011 09:43, Squashme wrote:

"The Road Board, created by the Development and Road Improvements
Bill, published in August 1909, gave grants from the fund to local
authorities to repair roads damaged by motorists. Even in the early
days of motoring, roads were mostly paid for by general and local
taxation. Paying Road Fund dues was never a fee for using a road,

...allegedly. Nevertheless, one was not and still is not allowed to use the
roads without paying that fee at whatever level it was or is set.

"May I use the roads with my motor vehicle?"

"Have you got a valid Road Tax disc on it?"

"No."

"In that case, the answer is NO."

What is said at that URL is a bit like claiming that the entrance fee to a
cinema or theatre *isn't a charge for being able to watch the film or show.
Actually, in some hyper-pedantic sense, that would be more true than claiming
that Road Tax isn't a fee for use of the roads, since some might pay for
entrance, head straight for the bar and stay there.

And some might jive in the aisles, let off fire extinguishers and
throw bottles at the screen, claiming a "right" to do it. They should
pay extra for their damage.
A party of vicars might well spread an aura of calm and peace amongst
the whole audience, and just drop the odd slice of cucumber on the
carpet. They might well be let in for free.

But they aren't, are they?

Yes, the gentle vicars do get to use the roads for free, unlike the
thuggish motorists.

Don't think so. The local vicar of this parish has to pay his Road Tax like
anyone else.

As a non-motoring cyclist, he should refuse.

He might have a bike as well as the car, I suppose. Never seen a bike at the
vicarage though.

Then he should stay away from the cinema, and certainly not rip out
the seats. Only cycling vicars should get in free.

On 13/09/2011 09:43, Squashme wrote:

(http://ipayroadtax.com/)

Oh that's a totally unbiased site that can be relied on to be accurate......


Not.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University