❓ I refer to a written response provided by Racing and Wagering WA (RWWA) on 10 February 2026, in response to questions regarding post-racing outcomes for thoroughbred and standardbred horses in Western

I refer to a written response provided by Racing and Wagering WA (RWWA) on 10 February 2026, in response to questions regarding post-racing outcomes for thoroughbred and standardbred horses in Western Australia during the financial year 2025 (FY2025).RWWA's response provided the following reported retirement pathway data for FY2025:Thoroughbreds: 28 (3%) killed as unsuitable for rehoming; 845 (87%) retired or rehomed, comprising 148 to breeding, 402 to equestrian pursuit, 205 to non-equestrian pursuit, 12 to OTTWA Estate, and 78 through auction or private sale.Standardbreds: 18 (5%) killed as unsuitable for rehoming; 273 (76%) retired or rehomed, comprising 83 to breeding, 119 to equestrian pursuit, 61 to non-equestrian pursuit, 10 to OTTWA Estate, and 0 through auction or private sale.RWWA's response records that 28 thoroughbreds and 18 standardbreds were killed upon retirement, described as unsuitable for rehoming due to "behavioural and/or medical" reasons. RWWA's response further states that post-retirement traceability extends to "first retirement pathway" only, with ongoing traceability dependent on voluntary uptake of the OTTWA Passport.The reported figures for horses killed (3% of thoroughbreds, 5% of standardbreds) and horses retired or rehomed (87% of thoroughbreds, 76% of standardbreds) total 90% and 81% respectively, leaving the retirement outcomes of the remaining 10% of thoroughbreds and 19% of standardbreds unreported in RWWA's response.RWWA's response directed any further questions to the Racing and Gaming Minister's office, and I ask:(a) Has the Minister sought or received advice from RWWA regarding the 28 thoroughbreds and 18 standardbreds recorded as killed upon retirement in FY2025 as unsuitable for rehoming? If so, what advice has the Minister received? In particular:(i) how many of those horses were killed due to behavioural problems, and how many due to medical conditions;(ii) for those horses killed due to behavioural problems, were those problems assessed and documented by a qualified veterinarian prior to the decision to kill; and(iii) what specific medical conditions were recorded for those horses killed due to medical conditions;(b) RWWA's FY2025 response records 205 thoroughbreds and 61 standardbreds as retired or rehomed to "non-equestrian pursuit." What oversight role does the Minister have in ensuring that disaggregated outcome data is collected and retained for this cohort? In particular:(i) how many of those horses were rehomed specifically as paddock or companion horses; and(ii) how many of those horses were placed into equine assisted therapy programs;(c) RWWA's FY2025 response records 148 thoroughbreds and 83 standardbreds as retiring to breeding purposes. What oversight role does the Minister have in ensuring that post-breeding retirement outcomes for those horses are recorded? In particular:(i) how many thoroughbreds and standardbreds that subsequently retired from breeding during FY2025 were confirmed as rehomed; and(ii) what is the total number of thoroughbreds and standardbreds that retired from breeding purposes during FY2025, regardless of known rehoming status;(d) RWWA's FY2025 response records that 3% of thoroughbreds and 5% of standardbreds were killed upon retirement, and that 87% of thoroughbreds and 76% of standardbreds were retired or rehomed. These figures total 90% and 81% respectively. Will the Minister confirm whether the retirement outcomes of the remaining 10% of thoroughbreds and 19% of standardbreds are recorded by RWWA? If not, why not;(e) RWWA's FY2025 response describes support through the OTTWA Programs as available to horses "considered medically and behaviourally suitable for a post-racing career." What structured programs does the Minister oversee or fund specifically for horses who are not considered suitable for a post-racing career and who can only be rehomed as companion or paddock horses;(f) RWWA's FY2025 response states that post-retirement traceability extends to "first retirement pathway" only, with ongoing traceability dependent on voluntary uptake of the OTTWA Passport. What oversight role does the Minister have in ensuring that first retirement pathway data is independently verified and that welfare outcomes beyond first placement are monitored; and(g) If the Minister does not intend to take further action to address the reporting gaps identified in RWWA's FY2025 response, what criteria must be met before the Minister would require RWWA to report disaggregated and independently verified retirement outcome data? I refer to a written response provided by Racing and Wagering WA (RWWA) on 10 February 2026, in response to questions regarding post-racing outcomes for thoroughbred and standardbred horses in Western Australia during the financial year 2025 (FY2025).RWWA's response provided the following reported retirement pathway data for FY2025:Thoroughbreds: 28 (3%) killed as unsuitable for rehoming; 845 (87%) retired or rehomed, comprising 148 to breeding, 402 to equestrian pursuit, 205 to non-equestrian pursuit, 12 to OTTWA Estate, and 78 through auction or private sale.Standardbreds: 18 (5%) killed as unsuitable for rehoming; 273 (76%) retired or rehomed, comprising 83 to breeding, 119 to equestrian pursuit, 61 to non-equestrian pursuit, 10 to OTTWA Estate, and 0 through auction or private sale.RWWA's response records that 28 thoroughbreds and 18 standardbreds were killed upon retirement, described as unsuitable for rehoming due to "behavioural and/or medical" reasons. RWWA's response further states that post-retirement traceability extends to "first retirement pathway" only, with ongoing traceability dependent on voluntary uptake of the OTTWA Passport.The reported figures for horses killed (3% of thoroughbreds, 5% of standardbreds) and horses retired or rehomed (87% of thoroughbreds, 76% of standardbreds) total 90% and 81% respectively, leaving the retirement outcomes of the remaining 10% of thoroughbreds and 19% of standardbreds unreported in RWWA's response.RWWA's response directed any further questions to the Racing and Gaming Minister's office, and I ask: (a) Has the Minister sought or received advice from RWWA regarding the 28 thoroughbreds and 18 standardbreds recorded as killed upon retirement in FY2025 as unsuitable for rehoming? If so, what advice has the Minister received? In particular: (i) how many of those horses were killed due to behavioural problems, and how many due to medical conditions; (ii) for those horses killed due to behavioural problems, were those problems assessed and documented by a qualified veterinarian prior to the decision to kill; and (iii) what specific medical conditions were recorded for those horses killed due to medical conditions; (b) RWWA's FY2025 response records 205 thoroughbreds and 61 standardbreds as retired or rehomed to "non-equestrian pursuit." What oversight role does the Minister have in ensuring that disaggregated outcome data is collected and retained for this cohort? In particular: (i) how many of those horses were rehomed specifically as paddock or companion horses; and (ii) how many of those horses were placed into equine assisted therapy programs; (c) RWWA's FY2025 response records 148 thoroughbreds and 83 standardbreds as retiring to breeding purposes. What oversight role does the Minister have in ensuring that post-breeding retirement outcomes for those horses are recorded? In particular: (i) how many thoroughbreds and standardbreds that subsequently retired from breeding during FY2025 were confirmed as rehomed; and (ii) what is the total number of thoroughbreds and standardbreds that retired from breeding purposes during FY2025, regardless of known rehoming status; (d) RWWA's FY2025 response records that 3% of thoroughbreds and 5% of standardbreds were killed upon retirement, and that 87% of thoroughbreds and 76% of standardbreds were retired or rehomed. These figures total 90% and 81% respectively. Will the Minister confirm whether the retirement outcomes of the remaining 10% of thoroughbreds and 19% of standardbreds are recorded by RWWA? If not, why not; (e) RWWA's FY2025 response describes support through the OTTWA Programs as available to horses "considered medically and behaviourally suitable for a post-racing career." What structured programs does the Minister oversee or fund specifically for horses who are not considered suitable for a post-racing career and who can only be rehomed as companion or paddock horses; (f) RWWA's FY2025 response states that post-retirement traceability extends to "first retirement pathway" only, with ongoing traceability dependent on voluntary uptake of the OTTWA Passport. What oversight role does the Minister have in ensuring that first retirement pathway data is independently verified and that welfare outcomes beyond first placement are monitored; and (g) If the Minister does not intend to take further action to address the reporting gaps identified in RWWA's FY2025 response, what criteria must be met before the Minister would require RWWA to report disaggregated and independently verified retirement outcome data?