ACC and the Pullar case

You can hear my comments on Radio NZ's The Panel here. Skip the first 9 minutes.


On the Pullar/ACC case, John Key was quoted as saying:
"ACC deals with a huge number of complaints, a huge amount of data and there are always people who feel the system hasn't treated them fairly and that is partly because the big dispute always comes around the definition of a pre-existing condition. That at one level is at the heart of what sits with this Bronwyn Pullar claim.'' (Newstalk, via stuff).
Compare that claim about a pre-existing condition with Nick Smith's comments about Ms Pullar in his letter of reference for her (dated 7.7.11 - the same letter that got him into trouble when he was Minister for ACC):
"Bronwyn prior to the accident ... was well and a dynamic, capable person who worked hard and achieved a lot. To the best of my knowledge she did not have any health or other conditions or issues that would have compromised her capacity to work. She has a strong reputation as a very effective and efficient worker in both her voluntary and professional roles."
Whose version do you believe?