Motorists in France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Stockholm, Norway, Singapore, Australia and North America are familiar with the idea that they pay as they use certain roads.
But that has never really taken off in the United Kingdom and politicians, as Stephen Hammond, the roads minister, reveals, still seem reluctant despite the fact that ministers do not have the money to spend on big projects in this age of austerity.
An Ipsos Mori poll in 2010 showed that 65 per cent of UK adults opposed, in principle, the introduction of a pay-as-you-go system.
However, this figure reduced to 18 per cent under certain circumstances.
Resistance to road pricing is also high because motorists consider they already pay stiff annual duties on their cars and on the fuel they buy at the pumps - a problem politicians are all too aware of, having had to recently peg back fuel duties to reduce the cost pressures on households.
However, in April, the manufacturers' organisation the EEF called for road pricing to be put back on the agenda. It released a policy paper on transport, ahead of the British government's forthcoming spending review, in which it said it saw roads as the highest priority for investment and that the road system faced a £10 billion (Dh56.18bn) spending backlog.
"We are now feeling the ill effects, with the majority of firms reporting that the state of the nation's roads is significantly increasing their operating costs," says Roger Salomone, the EEF head of business environment policy.
Yet London has been successfully charging motorists for driving into the centre of the capital for a decade. The congestion charge - whereby cars and vans are charged a flat £10 for driving through a central zone on weekdays between 7am and 6pm - has been relatively successful and accepted, albeit with grumbles, by drivers.
However, other British cities such as Manchester and Edinburgh have been unable to copy it.
A report on the acceptability of road pricing, commissioned by the RAC Foundation - a pro-motorist group - in 2011 found a national system of road pricing could be acceptable to the public and may well cost less to implement than previously thought. It said drivers preferred automatic numberplate recognition systems to so-called tag and beacon systems, which are based on microwave technology to identify those who misuse tollways.
The report found considerable misunderstanding and ignorance about how a system would work and recommended trials in volunteer towns and cities, based on the Stockholm version of a weekday-cordon based system, with cameras at exit and entry points, followed by a referendum.
The Stockholm system, it reported, achieved significant traffic reductions with minimal charges. In the Swedish capital, charges of between 87p and £1.74, depending on the time of day, produced traffic reductions of more than 20 per cent.
Another report by the Institute of Fiscal Studies last year, also backed by the RAC Foundation, said there was a compelling case for road pricing.
The IFS said the current system of tax on fuel "cannot vary according to time and location", and so is unable to account for differences such as levels of congestion and demand.
"Taxes on road use, however, would be able to do so," it said.