[Jamroll]

Originally Posted by Variable

They still need to form a gov't by clumping together with other parties etc. to make a majority. Barring that, as soon as anyone has a major issue they can call a vote and change the gov't. Thus why many gov'ts that work like that are changing far more frequently than say the American administrations. There are pluses and minuses to that sort of system.

And even then it's still not that case that a small minority is dictating to the majority 'how to live', they're restricted by constitutions, charters, traditions, etc.

I think we're arguing at cross purposes here. What I stated above is how the UK system works (and unless it's dramatically different the Canadian system also). You said that's not how it works.

Now you're talking about parties joining together to make a majority government. That still doesn't change the fact that a party can have a majority government even if only a minority of the electorate votes for them, and this is exactly what happened in the UK in our last general election. The Labour party had an ultimate majority in the House of Commons even though they only got 30% of the overall vote. I'm assuming you know how a first-past-the-post system works.