RWWA Review Discussion Paper

JayJay · February 3

The Secretariat assisting the Department of Local Government, Industry Regulation and Safety, which is running the Independent Review of the Financial Sustainability and Governance of RWWA ( now known simply as the RWWA Review) have issued a discussion paper outlining what exactly will be on the table and what areas are being reviewed. It is an extensive list, even questioning potential changes to the Management Structure via Legislative amendments.

The Discussion Paper is in the process of being disseminated to all Industry Bodies (BOTRA, WACHRA etc) who will be invited to make submissions. Individuals are also encouraged to make submissions. The closing date for acceptance of submissions is Sunday March 7th 2026

David Templeman and Professor Andrew Harding will be leading the review with the support provided by the Department of LGIRS (Specifically Racing and Gaming) Officers.

This review may well be the last hurrah for the Harness Racing Industry. I would urge all involved in our Industry to read the Discussion Paper and get busy submitting your thoughts and suggestions. Failure to engage would simply play into the hands of those forces that have put us in the position we are in.

Link to the Discussion Paper:

Click on https://www.dlgsc.wa.gov.au/racing-gaming-and-liquor and click on the Press Release dated January 30th 2026 which is the Discussion Paper.

I will over the next couple of weeks be formulating my thoughts. I spent today organising established and available information , a planning day so to speak. There will be more "planning days" before the preparation of the submission. Fortunately, I have kept a running record of decisions/papers/documents/data/names and correspondence that have coincided with the disastrous decline of our Industry.

savethegame · February 3

David Hunter mentioned on Sentoday, that Thoroughbreds up 10% turnover since August, based on change in media rights. Harness racing flat no increase, with Greyhounds dropping 8/10 % same time frame.

JayJay · February 3

Strong and constant print and radio media support of thoroughbreds, Pinnacles Carnival, free to air 7 Plus TV, large contingent of quality interstate horses, large on course crowds, venue beautifully presented, ample free parking, post race concerts, serious and professional on course interviews pre and post race, all restaurants and bars open, well promoted ......definite imbalance on the charter of "promote each code equally".

Greyhounds getting the squeeze from Animal Activists amid threats of closure.

Compare with Harness....no carnival, no promotion, no interstate horses, Pacing Cup date changes almost annually, no media presence, very minimal on course attendance, no TV, pre-race twitter stuff not taken seriously by many participants, a bouncy castle with a mini petting farmhouse, exterior wall falling down, venue crumbling and dirty, public parking issues, revert to food vans at Michelin prices....

No brainer really, be very surprised if David Hunter had reported otherwise for the 6 months since August. At least the Harness turnover decline was arrested.

Chopchop43 · February 3

Will be interesting too see whether or not the voices of the participants will actually be heard and ideas used to help turn this industry around

JayJay · February 3

The voices can only be heard if they speak up. Past history suggests that when these opportunities arise, people either don't read submissions or discussion papers, don't support their Industry Representative bodies, don't attend Industry Information sessions, don't bother to put pen to paper but instead actively prosecute lethargy and bar room wisdom to be critical of either the inquirers or anybody who actively contributes.

From my point of view, the questions proposed in the Discussion Paper are exactly the type of questions that should be asked dealing with (for examples) fiscal sustainability of RWWA, governance changes and management transparancy, drivers of regional participation and an open ended invitation to raise other relevant issues that the review may wish to consider.

Of course, others after they have digested the Discussion Paper may wish to opt out of submitting their thoughts, that is their choice.

Chopchop43 · February 4

I mean seemed a fair bit of participation in regards to the Byford meeting in regards to the introduction to the HWOE system and everyone's stance on it, nothing seemed to come of it , all well and good to say support bodies like BOTRA and the like but if they dont press the issue with the powers to be and give up without a whimper its kind of hard to support and rally behind such bodies

Markovina · February 4

There are alot of issues - but the number 1 for me , is that WA Harness Racing have its own CEO - and everyone reports to that person , every club reports to that person , including M Radley at GP

And if GP is the dirty rundown dump that some posters have said it is then the CEO reads Radley the riot act - i mean it is supposed to be the premier Metro club , and be so easy to get some volunteers in to clean and spruce the place up .

The problem they have got - is that alot of people are like me , they hate filling in forms , its not laziness , they just hate it

Ithink David and the Professor would be better chairing an open forum , where all the key groups are represented , and those people all get their turn at the Microphone to spill their guts on what they consider the major issues of WA Trotting and thus there would be no chance on any ducking or diving on the 800 metre track retainment and spending $25 million as well - interested parties could finally have a say on that , and i think the Proffesor and Davids ears might prick when they hear what is finally allowed to be said - and Radley in that open forum will have no where to hide , he will at last have to face up to the music at long last

Where as to this point the pathetic weak as piiss interviewing on Radley on that major issue , honestly it is like listening/watching Andrew Bolt interviewing some Liberal - Country party hack it is that one sided

TimmyBee · February 4

Markovina said:
There are alot of issues - but the number 1 for me , is that WA Harness Racing have its own CEO - and everyone reports to that person , every club reports to that person , including M Radley at GP

And if GP is the dirty rundown dump that some posters have said it is then the CEO reads Radley the riot act - i mean it is supposed to be the premier Metro club , and be so easy to get some volunteers in to clean and spruce the place up .

The problem they have got - is that alot of people are like me , they hate filling in forms , its not laziness , they just hate it

Ithink David and the Professor would be better chairing an open forum , where all the key groups are represented , and those people all get their turn at the Microphone to spill their guts on what they consider the major issues of WA Trotting and thus there would be no chance on any ducking or diving on the 800 metre track retainment and spending $25 million as well - interested parties could finally have a say on that , and i think the Proffesor and Davids ears might prick when they hear what is finally allowed to be said - and Radley in that open forum will have no where to hide , he will at last have to face up to the music at long last

Where as to this point the pathetic weak as piiss interviewing on Radley on that major issue , honestly it is like listening/watching Andrew Bolt interviewing some Liberal - Country party hack it is that one sided

geez you talk rubbish

JayJay · February 4

Bad idea, I think Marko. I have been to "open forums" many times and I can't recall one that didn't turn into an abusive pie chucking session where the emotions of some get in the way of reasoned facts and argument and it descends into an often abusive and offensive bunfight.

Having people either get together in small groups or individuals who can calmly construct their arguments, supported by facts and figures, with time to edit and review and create a cogent, considered dialogue is, I think, the way to go.

And much as it is foreign for me to defend Michael Radley, the Review is not into Gloucester Park, it is into RWWA's governance and financial sustainability, a legislated QUANGO with responsibility to manage the entire racing and wagering shooting match including the TAB. Michael Radley as CEO is responsible to his members. Yes, many think that the team at Gloucester Park and the Owners Association display considerable over reach in terms of their power and their influence but it is up to RWWA to manage that relationship. As explained previously, Gloucester Park is a private club, it own it's racetrack, the review cannot enter the sphere of managing Gloucester Park no matter how poorly we perceive it to be run.

RWWA allocates race dates, stakemoney, meeting grants and it seems, redevelopment funding assistance to the tune of $25 miilion, to Gloucester Park and the review may well visit all of those areas, it may even consider caveats on certain aspects of its operation but it is not a vehicle for putting M. Radley on the public spit roast.

Markovina · February 4

TimmyBee said:

Markovina said:
There are alot of issues - but the number 1 for me , is that WA Harness Racing have its own CEO - and everyone reports to that person , every club reports to that person , including M Radley at GP

And if GP is the dirty rundown dump that some posters have said it is then the CEO reads Radley the riot act - i mean it is supposed to be the premier Metro club , and be so easy to get some volunteers in to clean and spruce the place up .

The problem they have got - is that alot of people are like me , they hate filling in forms , its not laziness , they just hate it

Ithink David and the Professor would be better chairing an open forum , where all the key groups are represented , and those people all get their turn at the Microphone to spill their guts on what they consider the major issues of WA Trotting and thus there would be no chance on any ducking or diving on the 800 metre track retainment and spending $25 million as well - interested parties could finally have a say on that , and i think the Proffesor and Davids ears might prick when they hear what is finally allowed to be said - and Radley in that open forum will have no where to hide , he will at last have to face up to the music at long last

Where as to this point the pathetic weak as piiss interviewing on Radley on that major issue , honestly it is like listening/watching Andrew Bolt interviewing some Liberal - Country party hack it is that one sided

geez you talk rubbish

Least i put a view , and it is an open forum

All you do is rubbish other posters views

38 posts hey , and i would say at least 30 of them is just being critical of other posters

Give us your views on WA Harness racing , and what changes need to be implemented !

sonny · February 4

Hi Timmy Bee, Please eleborate on your comment Thank You

JayJay · February 5

"Geez you talk rubbish"....well don't we all. Not a very christian approach to just dump on the bloke, at least explain a bit why.

twickss · February 5

There's also another factor.

RWWA has the monopoly on racing employment in W.A and a lot of skills are not transferable.

We all know if you speak up and rock the boat, you're gone.

People are scared to speak up because if you do, and your taken out the back and shot, you basically have to move to a different state or be willing to risk loosing everything.

I know many who want to speak up, but with mortgages and families to support, they can't risk it.

JayJay · February 5

Plenty of past evidence to support your comments......for example, the "great redundancy clean out" when management gave the "clear your desks, here is a cab fare home" order to about 20 staff when I think Charlotte Mills was in charge. I think, not 100%, that Hamilton was the Harness Manager back in those early HWOE days at the time.

The position of Handicapper was declared redundant.....only for it to be reinstated after the statutory 12 months lag time.....and an internal appointment of a new handicapper was then made, who may or may not have been the Greyhound form expert??

Some of the office staff made redundant were the only ones who knew how to do a "stakes payment run" and stakes payments for thoroughbreds went on hold for a couple of weeks whilst someone worked out how to use the programme.

The review opens the door for governance issues to be aired and investigated under some of the terms of reference:

Are RWWA's current governance, corporate culture and practices supporting industry growth and meeting changing community expectations? [Such as administrative transparency from management in implementing stakes cuts without any notification, such as operating without a Harness Director for well over 6 months and the shroud of mystery surrounding the appointment of a new director, such as the failure to release information (that was promised) on the success or otherwise of the NR system, such as advertising community club races for a certain stake with the full knowledge that the stake is subsidised by the said community club.........it could become a very long list].
What governance changes are required to support RWWA to ensure fairness and transparency in the industry in line with regulatory requirements et al [Like returning the HRCG to a true consultative body that represents the interests of the entire industry rather than an entitled few, like perhaps releasing minutes of their prognostications and decisions, like being open and transparent about returns on investment for all clubs on stakes paid versus revenue generated......again it could become a very long list].

And finally, the very much "open door" last paragraph on the Discussion Paper. Speak now or forever hold your peace.

"Are there any other matters related to the terms of reference that you would like to comment on? If yes, please advise of any relevant issues and/or opportunities that you would like the reviewers to note or consider".

warrenrobinson · February 5

Like does Racing WA subsidies salaries at any clubs.

G'day Punter!

In this Discussion

Who's Online

RWWA Review Discussion Paper

Comments