State property register essential to cutting wasteful government leases

The government spends billions of rand each year leasing private property for government departments, even as it owns thousands of buildings and substantial land holdings. This is not simply a question of lease costs. It raises a more fundamental question: Does the state have a sufficiently reliable record of what it owns, where those assets are located and how they are being used?

The answer matters because South Africa cannot manage public assets effectively without a credible Immovable Asset Register. Before the government can reduce unnecessary leasing, improve service delivery or make better use of public property, it must first know the full extent and condition of the assets under its control.

This is not an argument against the private sector. Public-private partnerships have an important role where they deliver value for money and serve the public interest. However, the government must first become a better steward of the assets it already owns. The Portfolio Committee on Public Works and Infrastructure has repeatedly emphasised the need for a consolidated and reliable Immovable Asset Register as the foundation of effective property management.

The first question when accommodating a government department should be straightforward: Does suitable state-owned accommodation already exist? If the answer is yes, it should be considered before private leasing options. Yet continued reliance on leased accommodation suggests shortcomings in how state property is identified, managed and allocated.

Consequences

The consequences extend beyond government expenditure. Vacant and underutilised state buildings contribute to the decline of inner cities and towns, weaken surrounding property values and create opportunities for illegal occupation, building takeovers and criminal activity. Public buildings that stand empty for years become symbols of neglect rather than instruments of development.

This is where the Property Management Trading Entity becomes critical. The entity manages a substantial portion of the state’s property portfolio, but it cannot perform this function effectively without accurate, up-to-date information about the assets under its control. A reliable Immovable Asset Register should not be viewed as an administrative requirement. It is a strategic governance tool.

Importantly, the issue extends beyond the national government. Municipalities rely on their own immovable asset registers as a core component of local planning and infrastructure management. These registers inform municipal integrated development plans, which guide investment, spatial planning, service delivery and economic development priorities.

For this reason, a reliable national Immovable Asset Register should not exist in isolation. It should align with municipal planning systems and support local government objectives. When national departments fail to account properly for their properties, municipalities are often left without accurate information needed for planning, rates administration, infrastructure coordination and urban regeneration initiatives.

A reliable national register would help municipalities identify underutilised public assets, support redevelopment opportunities and improve revenue collection. It would also strengthen cooperation across the spheres of government and provide a clearer picture of how public land and buildings can contribute to economic growth, housing development and service delivery. 

The management of immovable assets should therefore be viewed not only as a public works issue, but as a national development issue.

The scale of the challenge becomes apparent when one considers that the government reportedly owns approximately 88,000 buildings across the country yet continues to spend billions of rand on private leases. At the same time, vacant state properties often continue to incur maintenance, security and other holding costs. This points to weaknesses in asset management and coordination that a credible register could help address. 

Poor asset management

The Telkom Towers precinct remains one of the clearest examples of the consequences of poor asset management. Acquired in 2015 for use by the South African Police Service (SAPS), the site remains largely underutilised despite substantial expenditure on acquisition and refurbishment. At the same time, the SAPS continues to seek alternative accommodation.

The Auditor-General has raised material irregularities relating to the acquisition and management of the precinct. Reports indicate that close to R1-billion has been spent on the purchase and renovations, yet most of the buildings remain vacant. These findings raise important questions about value for money, project oversight and accountability. 

The portfolio committee has also asked the minister to provide the legal basis for withholding the forensic investigation report from parliamentary scrutiny. Transparency is essential if Parliament is to exercise effective oversight and ensure lessons are learnt.

Where financial controls, project management and asset utilisation fail, corrective action is required. Responsibility extends beyond individual officials and includes all those entrusted with oversight of public assets. Equally important is ensuring that systems exist to prevent such failures from recurring.

This is why the establishment of a professional State Property Company, as announced by the president, is welcome. However, no institutional reform will succeed without reliable information about the assets being managed. A credible national Immovable Asset Register should therefore be the starting point for reform, not an afterthought.

Operation Bring Back

Initiatives such as Operation Bring Back are important because they seek to reclaim illegally occupied state property. Yet the challenge goes beyond recovering buildings. The government must also ensure that public assets are actively used for public purposes. Returning departments to suitable state-owned accommodation, wherever possible, would improve asset utilisation, support urban renewal, and reduce pressure on the public purse.

Ultimately, SA’s property portfolio should be viewed as a strategic national asset. A reliable Immovable Asset Register would help the government understand what it owns, help municipalities plan more effectively, strengthen integrated development plans, support economic development and improve accountability. 

Until the state can accurately account for its assets, it will struggle to fully unlock their value for the benefit of the people it serves. DM