The Victorian Government has threatened to set up a trigger for a double dissolution election because of the dispute over the privatisation of the Port of Melbourne.

Talks to reach a deal with the Opposition reached an impasse, leaving the bill to sell the port's long-term lease marooned in the Upper House where Labor does not have a majority.

The Government passed a motion to refer the bill to the Parliament's Dispute Resolution Committee, which consists of seven Lower House and five Upper House MPs.

The Government-controlled committee will have 30 days to reach a resolution, but if the sale legislation is rejected by either house of Parliament the bill will become deadlocked.

That would give Premier Daniel Andrews the power to call a double dissolution election or withdraw the bill until the next election.

Greens leader Greg Barber accused Mr Andrews of having a "dummy spit" and using the provision as a political weapon to threaten the Opposition.

"The minute the Upper House rejects the finding of the dispute committee, the one that the Government controls, he's got an early election trigger in his back pocket," he said.

"If you're Matt Guy [Opposition Leader] you could be eating your Weetbix one morning, any day from now until 2018, and get a call saying he's on his way to the Governor."

Focus of sale is commercial, not for public good: Guy

Mr Barber said Mr Andrews was implying voters were wrong not to have given Labor unfettered power through control of both houses.

"There's a reason why you have an Upper House, and it's to keep a firm hand on the shoulder of the Government with all their crazy plans," he said.

The Government and the Opposition have spent weeks wrangling over the bill, with the parties struggling to reach a compromise over a controversial compensation clause that would entitle the leaseholder to a payout if a rival port was developed.

Ahead of Parliament's return on Monday, the Government was optimistic legislation would finally pass State Parliament this week.

Opposition Leader Matthew Guy said he wanted the clause to apply for a 15-year lease instead of 50, to minimise the risk of a big taxpayer bill.

"The Government's proposal is focussed on a commercial sale, it's not focussed on what is in the public good," he said.

The dispute could blow a multi-billion-dollar hole in the state budget because Labor has already factored the proceeds of the sale into its bottom line to fund its election pledge to remove 50 railway level crossings over two terms.

The Government has threatened to bypass Parliament to sell the port but that could affect the price.