An illegal bookie recently told BusinessWeek that his revenue from a year of gambling "arbitrage" on Hong Kong horse racing was $602,000 ($4.7-million Hong Kong) after playing off the difference between the fixed-odds wagering offered by offshore Internet gambling sites and the Hong Kong Jockey Club's betting odds.

The Jockey Club is waging an aggressive campaign against the offshore companies, which it says threatens to undermine the organization's monopoly on horse race betting.

The betting duty program, which includes a network of 124 off-track betting facilities, paid $1.5-billion to the government in 1999-2000 from betting turnover of more than $10-billion, then paid $1.6-billion in 2000-'01.

Overall betting duty from both horse racing and lotteries is forecast to contribute 7% of the Hong Kong government's total annual revenues for the 2001-2002 fiscal year, or $1.7-billion. In addition, the Jockey Club has raised purses for its annual Hong Kong International Races each of the last two years, boosting them to $4.5-million in 2000 and nearly $7-million this year.

But citing reduced revenues and the need to fill loopholes in current gambling law, the Jockey Club and other officials have called for the Hong Kong government to pass legislation outlawing offshore bookmaking.

At the Bills Committee on Gambling's December 7 meeting, Chairman Andrew Cheng questioned the need for urgent passage of such legislation, in light of an ongoing comprehensive review of the government's gambling laws—including possible legalization of soccer betting—that is currently slated for completion in six to 12 months.

Cheng and others also questioned the proposed amendment's scope, enforceability, and the roadblock it might present to unencumbered access to information.

"The chairman, Mr. Sin Chung-kai and Mr. James To expressed reservations that the scope of the Bill was too wide," the meeting's minutes said. "They considered that the bill would impose restrictions on the satisfaction of human desire and have substantial impact on individual freedom."