Karl du Fresne blogs about the Pullar fiasco in his normal curmudgeonly manner:
[I]tâ€™s clear that a huge part of the problem, right from the outset, has been the determination of claimant Bronwyn Pullar and her advocate, former National Party president Michelle Boag, to exploit their political connections to advance Pullarâ€™s case.
Some of those connections, notably Smith and ACC deputy chair John McCliskie, whom Oâ€™Sullivan says unwisely agreed to intervene on Pullarâ€™s behalf, have exacerbated the affair by getting involved when they should have seen the danger signs â€“ Pullar might as well have had a flashing red light surgically implanted in her skull â€“ and stayed well clear. But their bad judgment shouldnâ€™t be allowed to obscure the fact that Pullar and Boag have used their contacts, inside knowledge and media savvy to pull every string they can in order to extract a settlement on the most advantageous terms.
These women take no prisoners. Pullar clearly has a highly developed sense of entitlement and isnâ€™t content to take her place in the ACC queue along with the hoi-polloi. She and Boag have used a repertoire of sophisticated tactics not available to run-of-the-mill ACC claimants, and while they have presumably operated entirely within the law, I donâ€™t buy the spin that Pullar is the helpless victim that she has been made out to be. Oâ€™Sullivanâ€™s piece helps put the whole malodorous affair in perspective.