Yeah, I guess having to create coalitions waters down the message? And smaller blocs having more sway than their actual numbers?
I actually think left wing/right wing isn't a good description of US political parties, more like a bigger FED/smaller Fed division, although this is somewhat more obvious in the hinterlands than in Washington.
It does water down the legislation, that's true. OTOH, though, it allows the opposition parties to actually have a say in legislation-making. One thing I dislike about the US system is that due to the two-party system, there will always be a majority party that could -if it wanted to- rule without input from the opposition. The US executive and judicial branches provide restraint for that kind of thing, but in the Canadian system your vote isn't wasted if it happens to be for a representative that isn't in the ruling party.
In the interest of fairness, here's the things I
don't like about the Canadian political system:
-Party loyalty is heavily enforced. Members of a political party are heavily influenced -some might say forced- to vote the party line in Parliament. Not doing so can lead to ejection from the party, or non-consideration for Senate or Cabinet positions.
-The Senate serves as a rewards system, controlled by the Prime Minister. In practice, Senate seats are given out as rewards for party loyalty. This was
not its original purpose.
-The Bloc Quebecois: A Federal-level party dedicated to the sovereignty of a province (Quebec). Srsly, this is stupid.
-The balance of power between the three branches of government is heavily weighted in favour of the Executive. The Prime Minister is defined as the leader of the winning party, and via party loyalty and Senate appointments he exercises more than his fair share of power.
-Our official head of state is Queen Elizabeth; a vestigial remnant of our beginnings as a British colony. In practice, though, she exerts no control over the government, apart from the signing of bills into law (Royal Assent).