While it's not always good, it does allow government to move quickly and avoids the kind of weird deadlocks (eg. over healthcare, the budget) that one sees in the US.
There are also limits: MPs individually vote, and on something that was hugely controversial they would defy the whips. It's not "the Government" but a collection of individuals. And in the end we can vote them out and overturn absolutely any legislation in the next Parliament.
Allowing government to move quickly and without restriction is not something that many would see as a good thing.
Government deadlocks are not always a bad thing, either, particularly when the issue is controversial. I'd argue that it is far better to have an issue debated and for compromises to occur, than to have one party's solution shoved quickly into place. This includes so-called emergencies, which are often excuses to go after civil liberties.
And the lack or party disaplin means that you have to make lots of dubious deals to dole out pork or to pander to fringe extremists. Oh and in most places adding unrealted riders to bills for pork is banned.
Germany has the same problem caused by PR Andrea Merkal needs 1 green vote to stay in power so buy buy Nuclear power
I am sure Rep or Dem whips visiting the HOC must be jelous of the power that their counterparts have.
There are also limits: MPs individually vote, and on something that was hugely controversial they would defy the whips. It's not "the Government" but a collection of individuals. And in the end we can vote them out and overturn absolutely any legislation in the next Parliament.