Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni said Cabinet will not comment on the latest spat between Minister of Public Enterprises Pravin Gordhan and the parliamentary committee over the SAA-Takatso deal.
Ntshavheni said Parliament had its own processes and Cabinet would not be drawn on those processes.
Gordhan is involved in a spat with the portfolio committee on public enterprises after it said it would ask the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) to probe the collapsed SAA deal.
Ntshavheni was on Thursday briefing the media when she said Cabinet would not be drawn on what happening between Gordhan and Parliament.
I am sure you are fully aware the processes in parliament are not part of the deliberations of Cabinet. The separation of powers doctrine still applies, said Ntshavheni.
We will not comment on the processes of Parliament and the minister is entitled to act in accordance with what he fells has to be done, but parliament will process its work and when Parliament has resolved, in respecting the separation of powers doctrine, will take a decision.
Gordhan hit back at the committee after it said it would go ahead with the plan to ask the SIU to probe the SAA-Takatso deal.
The department of public enterprises said it would take legal action as the report by the committee was baseless and unfounded.
The Department of Public Enterprises deems a report by Parliaments Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises on the cancelled South African Airways (SAA) equity partnership transaction as a concoction of lies and deceit meant to confuse the public, and it said it reserves all its legal rights over the committees unsubstantiated conclusions, said the department.
It said the committee had gone beyond the mandate that was given to it by the speaker to process the matter.
It said the committee had listened to the version of former Director-General Kgathatso Tlhakudi and not the department.
It accused the committee of disregarding its submissions on matters at hand.
The department said it did not mind to be scrutinised as allowed by the law, but that should be done in a fair and proper manner.
The adversarial way that the committee has conducted itself during this exercise also indicates that the committee has never been interested in the facts but in castigating the department of public enterprises and kicking the can down the road for political expediency and spectacle.
The department will protect its integrity using all legal avenues available to it.
The department said the committee had also ignored the findings of its legal adviser that there was no corruption in the SAA deal.
