Instead hearings on the recent ACT budget, originally scheduled to begin on Monday, have now been deferred after WorkSafe ACT issued a prohibition notice.

That notice was issued after Workplace Safety Minister Mick Gentleman raised concerns with the watchdog about the risks of face-to-face meetings involving public servants and Assembly members.

It had been suggested individuals could be unnecessarily placed at risk of contracting COVID-19.

Speaker Joy Burch told MLAs on Monday the notice was the result of a disagreement between a government minister and the Assembly's select committee on estimates about whether or not territory officials could choose to participate remotely.

Ms Burch is now threatening WorkSafe ACT, an ACT government agency, with legal action if the prohibition notice is not lifted. It had not been lifted by her deadline of 10.15am on Monday.

Ms Burch is of the view WorkSafe ACT's contention it had "reasonable grounds" to find the Assembly had contravened Section 19 of the Work Health and Safety Act was "entirely without merit".

WorkSafe ACT accused the Assembly of failing to identify "reasonably foreseeable risks in the workplace or implemented adequate control measures" to prevent the possible transmission of COVID-19. It wants the assembly to undertake a risk assessment into face-to-face committee meetings.

Ms Burch, in turn, believes the prohibition notice is an assault on the "privileges of the Assembly" and a matter of "deep constitutional significance". She believes WorkSafe ACT could "quite possibly" be in contempt of the Assembly.

It is, whichever way you look at it, a strange and unlikely scenario worthy of the full treatment by either the Yes Minister team or Monty Python. If this was happening in the federal sphere, Australia would quickly become an international laughing stock.

While it may be the case all parties have acted with the best of intentions, they appear to have become so caught up in their own concerns they have ignored the law of unintended consequences

This is a battle nobody either needed, or likely even wanted. It has apparently erupted as a result of a failure by well remunerated - and presumably appropriately skilled - servants of the people to communicate effectively with each other.

Why, for example, didn't WorkSafe ACT pursue further discussions with the Assembly rather than coming down like a ton of bricks with a heavy handed prohibition notice shutting down the budget estimates? We are, after all, talking about committee meetings involving vaccinated individuals, who have the unfettered right to wear masks if so desired, in a setting designed for this purpose.

It's not quite the same as a rogue crane operator using poorly maintained equipment and untrained drivers on a high rise building site.

And, on the other hand, given there are legitimate concerns about COVID-19, why wasn't more consideration given to allowing officials to attend remotely?

That has occurred previously without rupturing the fragile fabric of democracy. Surely a working compromise could have been negotiated.

Rather than squaring off over prerogatives, responsibilities and respective powers, the Assembly and WorkSafe ACT need to talk and put this to rest as quickly as possible.

Canberrans deserve better from their government and its agencies.