The trouble with Parliaments: Our friends to the north remind us of the trickiness of separating the head of government and the head of state, and the double trickiness of coalition governments in a parliament: you never know when a leader (or party) may get sacked.
So Martin's Liberals are out of power after scandals. From all appearances, they've been making a pretty decent job of it: record low unemployment and budget surpluses.
This move actually makes a lot of sense to me. If I were a member of a smaller party allied with the Liberals, I wouldn't want to be associated with scandals. Much better to vote no confidence, hold an election, and side with the eventual winner after negotiations. Very clever.
Gaufridus mentioned the wild card of the Bloc Quebecois, who with a good showing could all but prevent an automatic majority of one of the major paries. What leverage!
This is why I am torn with regards to trying out parliamentary democracy here in the U.S. While we could sack incompetent leaders much more effectively - and wouldn't that be nice right now? - the possibility of wacky splinter movements getting leverage on major parties gives me pause.
What are everyone's thoughts on Parliaments in general? I'm curious. I hope to discuss this more when I get around to my (much delayed, I admit) posts on the executive power.