Correctional Services paid R3,735 for gravy powder that costs R920, but Minister Pieter Groenewald stepped in
Minister of Correctional Services, Pieter Groenewald, said they paid R3,735 for gravy powder for one month, but renegotiated the price to R920.
They are also recovering the price difference for the first month, where they paid a higher price from the supplier.
Groenewald revealed this scenario during a Parliamentary question-and-answer session on the department’s budget.
Member of Parliament, Vuyolwethu Zungula, asked the Minister of Correctional Services whether he was aware of the high price they paid for gravy powder.
Groenewald responded, explaining that the contract for supplying non-perishable goods to Correctional Services came into effect on 1 April 2025.
In May 2025, the National Commissioner told Groenewald that they planned to renegotiate the contract prices. This process was finalised by June 2025.
He confirmed that the Department of Correctional Services did indeed pay R3,735.32 for 25 kg of gravy powder for the first month, which was exorbitant.
However, they took action. “The department re-negotiated the price to R920 and is recovering the difference in price for the first month from the supplier,” he said.
The Minister was also asked for the price of cooking oil. However, there was nothing untoward, as the price of R726.57 for 25 litres was in line with market rates.
The scrutiny over the prices which national departments pay for everyday goods is not unexpected, considering what happened at other state-run institutions.
Former Eskom CEO Andre de Ruyter revealed that the company paid R80,000 for knee pads, which cost R150 at Builders Warehouse.
The power utility also paid R26 for a single-ply roll of toilet paper, which cost R5, and R51 for a black refuse bag, which retailed for R2.99.
Loading ...
If it was millions involved, then we could probably assume corruption. Since it is only a few thousand per month, it might still be corruption, but is more likely to be a combination of incompetence by the buyer in the department, combined with a very inefficient procurement system and a supplier inflating his prices to take advantage of this inefficiency. A typical government department procurement system typically requires the buyer to get the computer to randomly select and request quotes from 3 suppliers in their system who supply that CATEGORY of the product (not necessarily the product, just the product category). There is then a good chance that 2 of the suppliers selected don’t even supply that product, so the buyer ends up with only one quote, possibly from a supplier who has tripled or quadrupled his price because he knows there is a good chance he won’t have any competition.