Millions spent at World Cup: What else could Gayton’s R31m buy?

The Millions spent on the World Cup by South Africa’s Sport, Arts and Culture Minister have become the phrase of the week.

It has fuelled debate from braai fires to office meetings. After Gayton McKenzie confirmed that programmes linked to South Africa’s presence at the 2026 FIFA World Cup carried a price tag of R31 million, many South Africans started doing what they often do:

They reached for a calculator.

In a country where every rand seems to have a waiting list, imaginations quickly turned from stadium lights to potholes, clinics and classrooms.

Whether you support the spending or not, the numbers invite one irresistible question. What else could R31 million buy?

WHERE COULD THE MILLIONS SPENT ON THE WORLD CUP HAVE GONE?

The R31 million covered international travel, accommodation, hospitality suites, match tickets, an exhibition match and nation-branding activities.

McKenzie also indicated that the 20 fan packages were privately sponsored, while the department funded the cultural programme for 20 artists. Opposition MPs have questioned whether taxpayers received value for money and have called for greater detail on the spending.

Now for the fantasy shopping list. According to recent government housing subsidy figures, a fully subsidised RDP home costs about R300 000 to build. That means R31 million could contribute towards more than 100 homes.

Using National Treasury estimates for clinic infrastructure, the same amount could also help refurbish community health facilities or purchase medical equipment that serves thousands of patients.

WHY THE MILLIONS SPENT ON THE WORLD CUP STRUCK A NERVE

Context matters: South Africa has an official unemployment rate above 30%, and many citizens live in utmost poverty.

Many public schools still rely on pit toilets or ageing classrooms. Municipalities battle with roads, water leaks and electricity failures. Sports facilities in many communities also need repairs.

That is why the debate has gained momentum. What if those millions resurfaced roads? What if they repaired sports fields? What if they bought ambulances?

Suddenly, everyone becomes an armchair finance minister, armed with strong opinions instead of spreadsheets.

IS THERE A WINNING ANSWER?

McKenzie argues that international promotion delivers benefits that are harder to measure.

Tourism, investment and cultural exposure can generate economic returns over time. His department also says the cultural programme gives South African artists opportunities on a global stage.

Critics counter that future benefits remain uncertain while current needs are obvious. That tension explains why this spending refuses to disappear.

Perhaps the real issue is not football but mathematics.

South Africans have turned R31 million into the country’s latest national quiz. Everyone has a different answer, but almost everyone agrees: When public money is involved, the scorecard concerns the taxpayers.