Gautengâs provincial government is spending more than R230-million a year on rented district offices for the Gauteng Department of Education, even as public schools across the province come under intense budget pressure, according to a written reply tabled in the Gauteng Provincial Legislature.

The figures, revealed by Gauteng MEC for Education, Sport, Arts, Culture and Recreation, Lebogang Maile, in response to questions from the Democratic Alliance (DA), show that 10 of the departmentâs 15 district offices are located in privately owned buildings.

Total annual cost

According to the reply, the department pays R15.27-million a month in rental costs, amounting to R183.2-million a year, plus another R47.2-million annually for municipal services. That brings the total annual cost of leasing and running the privately occupied district offices to more than R230-million, before security, cleaning and maintenance costs are added.

DA Gauteng education spokesperson Michael Waters said the province cannot claim it lacks money while continuing to spend hundreds of millions of rand on office rentals. He linked the office rental bill to broader concerns about the provinceâs education budget, saying the money spent on leased office space could be better spent supporting schools, teachers and learners.

According to the reply, no rental expenditure is incurred in respect of government-owned buildings.

âThe Gauteng Department of Education is responsible for rental payments relating to leased district office accommodation, while rental costs associated with the Departmentâs Head Office accommodation are borne by the Gauteng Department of Infrastructure Development and do not constitute expenditure incurred by the Gauteng Department of Education,â read the reply.

Daily Maverick sent questions to the Gauteng Department of Education on 4 August about whether it had approached the Department of Infrastructure Development to identify vacant or underused government buildings for district offices, the criteria used to justify leasing private premises instead of using state-owned facilities, and how such expenditure could be defended while schools faced budget cuts. At the time of publication, no response had been received.

Daily Maverick also sent questions to the Gauteng Department of Infrastructure about vacant government-owned buildings across the province, whether any were suitable to serve as district offices, and whether the province had calculated savings from using those buildings instead of continuing to lease private properties.

Department spokesperson Theo Nkonki said this matter was still subject to a forensic investigation by the Office of the Premier.

Classrooms left to count the cost

The criticism comes at a time when Gauteng schools are already under financial strain. In April, the Gauteng Department of Education announced that from April 2026, subsidies for more than 600 quintile 5 schools in the province would be decreased from R879 to just R315 per learner.

The department said the current funding arrangement was a temporary stabilisation intervention while it managed a R444-million shortfall in the current financial year and a projected R160-million shortfall over the 2026 medium-term expenditure period.

Deon Lerm, Gauteng Manager of the Federation of Governing Bodies of South African Schools (Fedsas), said this decision was placing enormous financial pressure on public schools.

âThe assumption is often that schools that charge school fees are wealthy schools. This is not the case. Not all quintile 5 schools in Gauteng are in wealthier neighbourhoods. In addition, Fedsasâ Education in Numbers report showed that applications for exemption of school fees and defaults on payments have increased drastically. At some schools up to 35% of school fees cannot be recovered. Combined with this sudden loss of more than 60% of the subsidy, the immensity of the provincial education departmentâs decision becomes clear,â he said.

The South African school quintile system categorises all public schools into five groups (quintiles) based largely on the socioeconomic status of the communities around them.

Quintile 1 schools serve the poorest 20% of learners, while quintile 5 schools serve the least poor 20%. This classification is primarily used to allocate funding and determine whether schools charge fees. Schools in quintiles 1, 2 and 3 have been declared no-fee schools and receive higher government subsidies to compensate for the lack of fee-based income.

Quintile 4 and 5 schools are fee-paying and receive smaller subsidies, as they are expected to raise additional funds through school fees and fundraising.

However, in practice shifting demographics mean many schools officially classified as affluent now serve predominantly low-income, working-class families. This creates a severe mismatch between a schoolâs geographic location and the financial reality of its learners, leaving schools to try to collect fees from parents who simply cannot pay.

Lerm said one example was a quintile 5 high school in Pretoria where only about 25% of parents paid school fees.

âThe school principal says their already limited budget was suddenly cut by R600,000 due to the new per-learner tariff. The best interests of learners remain their priority, which means that expenditure on aspects such as staff development is cut. Ultimately this affects quality education,â he said.

Running on a shoestring budget

A principal at another Pretoria-based high school who asked not to be named said the school was âbattling financiallyâ.

âWe have around 565 pupils, and we only received about 45% of the school fees. We rely on school fees to pay for utilities and security; additional teaching and non-teaching staff are another major expense,â said the principal.

âWe understand that there are parents who are unemployed and are cash-strapped, so even if we are to increase school fees, we have to keep our increase low because, as it stands, parents cannot afford to pay.â

With schools already tightening their belts, the provincial department will probably continue facing questions regarding their financial priorities.

Waters said they would submit follow-up questions to determine why privately leased offices remained in use, whether suitable state properties were standing empty, and whether the province had a âgovernment buildings firstâ policy. **DM **