All of those attacks on FPTP in favour of PR are absolutely true. However, I feel it is extremely bias to discuss those points without also pointing out that moving to PR will create an equal share of problems that currently don't exist with FPTP.

PR is not the savour of politics, it is not without faults. Any real debate on democratic reform needs to properly examine both systems, both the pros and the cons, and their implications on what we are looking for in a "democratic process".

I'm not going to go too much into the "problems" with PR, but I want to highlight that one of the biggest components to the parliamentary democratic system (UK, Canada etc.) is the idea of accountability. That accountability is manufested through numerous institutions and conventions in the parliamentary system.

One of these accountabilities is that of the individual MP to the constituents that elected him. This particular line of accountability does not exist in a PR system. Instead MP's solely accountable to their party/party leader, in order to maintain their position on the current list ordering for the party (in PR system, each party ranks each of them members in desending order, and when they get assigned seats based on their proportion of the vote, they hand out seats starting at the top of that list and work there way down until they are out of seats).

That is a very high level overview of one of the MANY issues with PR.