Gauteng Education MEC Lebogang Maile has rejected claims that funds intended for schools were used to pay for office accommodation, saying the department does not procure or lease office space and only pays rental for district offices managed by another provincial department.
Who is responsible for district office accommodation?
In a statement issued on Thursday, Maile said the Gauteng Department of Infrastructure Development is the custodian of provincial immovable assets under the Government Immovable Asset Management Act, and is responsible for procuring and managing office accommodation.
The Gauteng Department of Education (GDE), Maile emphasised, is only responsible for making rental payments where district offices are in leased premises.
“The Gauteng Department of Education does not procure office accommodation, enter into lease agreements for such accommodation, or administer a budget for the procurement of office accommodation,” the MEC said.
DA raises concerns over R230 million bill
The comments came after Democratic Alliance (DA) Gauteng education spokesperson Michael Waters said the provincial government spends more than R230 million a year on rented and operating costs for GDE district offices while schools are short of funding.
According to information cited by the DA — drawn from Maile’s written response to questions tabled in the Gauteng Provincial Legislature — the province spends R15.27 million a month (about R183.2 million a year) on rent for 10 district offices housed in privately owned buildings. An additional R47.2 million is reportedly spent annually on municipal services, producing a total in excess of R230 million.
Waters questioned why government-owned buildings were not being used for the district offices and suggested the practice might be enriching private landlords at taxpayers’ expense, particularly while some schools face funding reductions.
“The fact that two-thirds of the department’s district offices are housed in privately leased buildings raises serious questions about whether the Provincial Government is making the best use of its own property portfolio or unnecessarily enriching private landlords at taxpayers’ expense,” Waters said.
Context: schools under pressure
The DA also pointed to cuts within education budgets, saying the GDE had reduced per-learner allocations to affected Quintile 5 schools by about 64%. That claim formed part of the backdrop to the criticism of office rental expenditure.
Maile’s response does not dispute the rental payments themselves but attributes responsibility for procuring and managing property to the infrastructure department. He reaffirmed the GDE’s narrow role in making rental payments where necessary.
What this means for parents and schools
For school governing bodies and parents already contending with tighter budgets, the DA’s figures feed frustration over resource allocation. The exchange exposes how responsibilities across provincial departments can cause political friction and public concern when spending trends appear to conflict with frontline service needs.
- Accountability question: Who should optimise use of provincial property to limit private rentals?
- Budget priorities: How will rental and municipal payments affect allocations to schools and learners?
- Transparency: Will the provincial departments release detailed breakdowns of district office locations and costs?
Figures at a glance
| Item | Amount |
|---|---|
| Monthly rent for 10 private district offices | R15.27 million |
| Annual rent (reported) | R183.2 million |
| Annual municipal services cost | R47.2 million |
| Combined annual cost (reported) | More than R230 million |
Neither the DA nor the MEC provided a full, line-by-line public breakdown of the addresses or lease terms for the district offices in question in the material referenced in the legislature questions. Maile’s statement limits the GDE’s role to rental payments rather than procurement or lease administration.
Officials in the Gauteng Department of Infrastructure Development were not quoted in the material supplied. The exchange raises a procedural issue: if one department procures and manages property while another pays rentals, who is politically and administratively accountable when spending appears to outstrip perceived need?
For now, parents, ward councillors and school managers seeking clarity will look to the provincial executive and the infrastructure department for a fuller accounting of how the province uses its property portfolio — and whether more school funding could be freed by relocating district offices into existing government-owned buildings.
Reporting from Johannesburg.
