eh? Doesn't really seem to be a situation very different compared with any other parliamentary democracy, as far as I can tell.
It probably isn't although a lot of the foreign press and even british press seems to be making a big deal out of the potential outcome and declaring that a lot of reform needs to be done to the process. As an outsider of course perhaps I'm not up to speed with how actual people feel though.
I think the British press is making a big deal of it because the UK hasn't had a hung/minority parliament in quite a while (1974, or so wikipedia tells me).
In contrast, Canada has had minority governments continually since 2004, and it's quite common in other countries as well.
As for calls for reform, many countries that follow the Westminister "First-past-the-post" model always have people bitching about it and desiring a system of proportional representation. I've never been sold on PR, but then, I'm not far-left in my politics, which is usually the segment that cries out for PR.
Probably, but from an American pov it's quite odd. A comparable analogy would be if in 2008, there was no presidential election per se, and instead the presidency was won by whichever party won the required seat majority in the House of Representatives (the senate is so shitty it doesn't exist in my analogy!). A lot of people just assume Brits are going to go out and vote for Brown, Cameron, or Clegg.
Ya, that's a decent analogy. And even though Brits technically
aren't directly voting for Brown, Cameron, or Clegg, the leaders of the parties can often be what people base their vote on, not their specific member of parliament.
Certainly here in Canada, the results of our most recent election had a lot to do with the leadership aspect of Harper vs. Dion.
