Public Funds Unaccounted For as World Cup Delegation Spending Questioned

PARLIAMENT LEFT IN DARK AS WORLD CUP SPENDING DETAILS RAISE SERIOUS QUESTIONS

R31 million in public funds. That is what South Africans are still waiting to have properly accounted for, after a Portfolio Committee hearing on Sport, Arts and Culture exposed serious gaps in how the Department spent money on its 2026 FIFA World Cup delegation.

The revelations emerged during a hearing at which Minister Gayton McKenzie was scheduled to account for the Department’s World Cup expenditure. McKenzie departed before substantive questioning began at 6:00 pm, citing an urgent presentation, and did not return until approximately 8:30 pm, after most members had completed their questions. His social media account suggested he may have been engaged in Patriotic Alliance political business in George during his absence.

Two major concerns have surfaced. The first involves the composition of the official 18-member delegation. The Minister and seven members of his own office comprised eight of those 18 members, representing 44 percent of the entire official contingent. That group included Patriotic Alliance co-founder and Ministerial Adviser Charles Cilliers, Chief of Staff Nontsikelelo Pule, Pogiso Mokwena, Private and Appointment Secretary Gareth Brown, Yusuf Bodhania, spokesperson Stacey-Lee Khojane, and Melissa Davids.

The Department could not adequately explain why so many members of the Minister’s political office were assigned to perform operational functions that should ordinarily fall within the Department’s specialist capacity. The Minister’s Private and Appointment Secretary, for instance, was tasked with coordinating the Legends Programme and cultural experiences. Administrative staff were deployed to fan-park and programme functions. Officials were unable to articulate what specialised skills these individuals possessed, why they were selected over relevant departmental professionals, or what measurable outcomes each produced.

The second concern centres on airfare costs that appear extraordinary and lack proper explanation. Nontsikelelo Pule’s airfare was approximately R593,219 for travel to only two cities. Pogiso Mokwena’s came to approximately R294,703 for four destinations. Stacey-Lee Khojane’s airfare was approximately R181,692 for one city, while Charles Cilliers’ reached approximately R375,642 across three cities. By contrast, other delegates reportedly travelled to three destinations for less than R50,000. Gareth Brown’s airfare to Pachuca, Mexico City and Monterrey was recorded at approximately R46,668.

The Department acknowledged that the travel agency had not properly reconciled the expenditure and that certain amounts appeared to include personal travel unrelated to the World Cup programme. This creates uncertainty about what portion of these extraordinary amounts represents official travel, what relates to personal travel, whether the State initially carried any personal expenses, and whether all amounts have been recovered.

The Department’s so-called comprehensive close-out report has been effectively reduced to a draft following these discrepancies. Officials requested additional time to finalise and audit the figures, and were unable to provide complete reconciled breakdowns. This occurred despite the Department’s own presentation describing the document as the “final close-out position” while simultaneously admitting that the expenditure remained subject to final reconciliation. A report cannot be final and unreconciled at the same time.

South Africans were promised a strategic international programme. Instead, Parliament received evidence of a delegation heavily populated by the Minister’s own office, inexplicable flight costs, personal travel apparently mixed into official accounts, and figures that remain neither complete nor properly reconciled. Citizens have a direct stake in what follows: whether the Department produces a fully audited reconciliation, whether any personal travel costs improperly charged to the State are recovered, and whether those who authorised this delegation structure are held to account. The open question now is whether Parliament will accept anything less than a complete, independently verified answer.