Macpherson Orders Probe Into 6,238 State-Owned Homes Occupied by Government Officials as Disposal Plan Looms

Public Works and Infrastructure Minister Dean Macpherson has initiated a comprehensive review of 6,238 state-owned residential properties currently occupied by government officials. The move comes amid growing concerns over the cost and efficiency of maintaining such a vast housing portfolio, especially as the government prepares to implement a potential disposal plan. The directive was issued following a directive from Macpherson to Director-General Sifiso Mdakane, tasked with assessing the properties and developing a strategic framework for the possible sale or repurposing of those deemed unnecessary. The review encompasses all 6,238 properties, with a particular emphasis on those located in KwaZulu-Natal, which holds the largest share of the portfolio—3,626 units. This is followed by the Western Cape with 566 properties and Gauteng with 407. According to records, the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure spent approximately R39.6 million from its Day-to-Day Maintenance budget during the 2025/26 financial year. However, detailed expenditure data is only available for 108 properties, highlighting gaps in transparency and accountability. Mdakane has been given 30 days to compile a report that outlines the status of these properties, including the departments they are allocated to, their intended uses, and the current occupancy status. The report will also assess whether the allocation criteria, governance rules, rental conditions, housing entitlement checks, and tax treatments align with national standards. Furthermore, it will evaluate whether the properties are being leased in accordance with the Government Immovable Asset Management Act, the Public Finance Management Act, and National Treasury regulations. A key aspect of the review involves determining whether the rental charges are market-based and whether any deviations from standard practices were appropriately authorized. Macpherson emphasized that the state should reassess its ownership of thousands of residential properties, especially considering that many officials already receive housing allowances, subsidies, or other related benefits as part of their compensation packages. “I believe the state should not own more than 6,000 residential properties for government officials, particularly when many officials already receive housing allowances, subsidies or other housing-related benefits as part of their remuneration packages,” Macpherson stated. He argued that unless there is a clear and compelling operational justification for retaining a property, it should be sold. Macpherson also stressed that the state should not bear the ongoing costs of maintaining these properties indefinitely, especially given the strain on public finances. “The default position cannot be that the state indefinitely carries the maintenance, rates and other costs of thousands of residential properties while the public fiscus remains under immense pressure,” he said. The assessment aims to determine whether these properties continue to fulfill a legitimate public function and whether surplus assets should be removed from the state’s holdings. “We need to establish who is occupying each property, the basis on which it was allocated and whether it still serves a legitimate public purpose,” he explained. “Where properties are underutilized, unnecessary or no longer required for government operations, they should be released from the state’s portfolio through a transparent and legally compliant disposal process.” By focusing on reducing unnecessary expenditures, Macpherson hopes to redirect government resources toward infrastructure projects and services that directly benefit the public. The outcome of this review could lead to significant changes in how the state manages its real estate holdings, potentially impacting both fiscal responsibility and operational efficiency.