JOHANNESBURG, Wednesday 21 October 2026 — The Democratic Alliance (DA) has called on Gauteng Education MEC Lebogang Maile to account for reported irregular expenditure of R7.2 billion linked to a textbook and stationery procurement contract awarded to Bongani Rainmaker Logistics.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, DA Gauteng spokesperson for education Michael Waters said the party would seek further information from the Auditor-General, National Treasury and the provincial education department.
The demand follows reporting concerning procurement compliance failures associated with education contracts, raising questions about oversight and accountability for public spending.
DA raises concerns over procurement findings
Waters said the reported R7.2 billion formed part of approximately R20.7 billion in irregular expenditure identified across provincial education departments.
The DA attributed the figures to a recent News24 report.
According to the party, the irregularity concerned procurement requirements relating to the evaluation of a successful bidder against minimum personnel specifications.
The DA argued that the reported findings required a detailed explanation from the Gauteng Department of Education.
The figures cited by the party have not been independently reconciled against the underlying Auditor-General documentation.
Irregular expenditure refers to spending that does not comply with applicable legislation or procurement requirements. It does not automatically establish fraud, theft or financial loss.
Party says concerns were raised earlier
Waters said the DA had previously raised concerns about contracts awarded to Bongani Rainmaker Logistics.
According to the party, it approached the Auditor-General in April 2026 requesting an investigation into contracts awarded to the company since 2019.
The DA said its concerns included procurement compliance, value for money and financial controls.
Waters also said the party had raised questions in May about more than R1.523 billion in learner-teacher support material expenditure that remained under assessment.
The party maintained that the latest reported findings reinforced its earlier concerns.
However, the statement did not establish that the Auditor-General had concluded a separate investigation specifically requested by the DA.
Questions to be submitted to MEC
Waters said the DA intended to submit written questions to Maile concerning the procurement contract.
The party wants information about the contract’s history, payments made over successive financial years and any disciplinary proceedings involving officials.
It also intends to seek updates from the Auditor-General and Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana regarding its earlier correspondence.
The DA said the department should explain whether officials had been held accountable for procurement failures.
No new disciplinary action, criminal charge or contract cancellation was confirmed in Wednesday’s statement.
The Gauteng Department of Education’s response to the latest demands was not established in the information available at publication.
Procurement oversight under scrutiny
Public procurement is subject to requirements intended to ensure that government contracts are awarded through lawful, fair and transparent processes.
Where expenditure is classified as irregular, accounting officers and relevant oversight institutions must determine the nature of the non-compliance and the appropriate corrective action.
The DA said the scale of the reported expenditure made accountability particularly important at a time when schools faced pressure on operational resources.
The party argued that procurement failures involving substantial public funds required closer scrutiny, irrespective of whether financial losses had been established.
The reported findings also raise questions about the effectiveness of controls governing the procurement of learning materials.
Further accountability steps expected
Waters said the DA would pursue the matter through correspondence with oversight institutions and written questions to the provincial education department.
The next significant development will be whether the department, Auditor-General or National Treasury provides further information concerning the reported expenditure and any corrective measures.
For now, the DA’s intervention represents a demand for accountability rather than confirmation of a new investigation or disciplinary process.
