Voting independent? It can be a risky move

For voters frustrated with the two major parties, voting for minor parties like the Greens or teal independents can be tempting.

But think twice before doing so.

Voting for minor parties, especially in the House of Representatives, is a risky move.

This is because it is in the House of Representatives where government is not only formed but also where its overall policy direction and legislation is developed before it goes to the Senate for further review and scrutiny and becomes law.

If the policy direction of legislation is so modified by haggling and negotiating before it even gets to the Senate (where there will be further compromises and cross-party deals) then Australia risks not just political instability but policy inertia and gridlock.

History backs this up. The 2010 Gillard Labor minority government, reliant on Greens member Adam Bandt and three independents, secured the carbon tax but at the cost of rampant instability.

Incessant horse-trading led to a perception of chaos, and Labor was trounced at the 2013 election.

The problem cuts both ways. A Coalition government formed with the support of independents, teals, or the Katter Australia Party - with their widely divergent views, varying from issue to issue - could be just as unstable, driving excessive expenditures and erratic, ad hoc policies.

Australians, who value practical outcomes, don't need their governments lurching from one extreme to the next.

A vote for minor parties or independents can be more meaningful in the Senate, where they can hold governments accountable without the chaos of coalition deals that can destabilise government and hamstring their ability to address the nation's looming budgetary crisis.

The Senate's proportional representation system gives smaller parties a platform to scrutinise governments and hold ministers to account.

When minor parties hold the balance of power, they can force governments to justify their actions and rectify their mistakes.