Letter: holding the Keeper to account (2)

Tony McAndrew (Journal, December 2017, 6) asks some pertinent questions. The Keeper's reply does not answer the questions. Why did the Keeper persist with technology which was outdated when it was developed? The Keeper drags out the usual platitudes. It is not good enough. In a previous letter to the Journal I asked who would stand up and take responsibility for the ARTL fiasco, but no one has done so. Now we have the 2012 Act, and wonder of wonders, the digital discharge service which might actually work. It still doesn't address the issue however of the historic waste of money.