Are you looking forward to a proportional voting system without electors in the US as well??
There are no absolute “fair” systems. The first past the post system almost always guarantees a majority government. Yes, the Reform party received more than 4 million votes and only 4 seats in the Commons, whereas the Lib Dems garnered roughly 3.5 million votes and received (so far) 71 places in the Parliament.
So, is a proportional system fairer then? Not necessarily. We have lots of examples here in post-war Europe where very small, often extreme parties have made up the balance of power. In Sweden we have had several periods when the former Communists (the Left Party) or the Greens (both in the range of 4 - 8%) have been able to run roughshod over the majority of the voters because they were able to make up the difference between one side of the political spectrum (usually the socialists) and 50.1%.
So, unless you want to be ruled by the socialists on the coasts I suggest you stick with the system you have.
The system wont change in the US .
It will for sure in the UK at some point
Lots of people complaining
Proportional and first past the post are not the only options. The Brits could give the French system a try where there’s a run-off with the top two contenders if no one gets above 50% of the vote. They could also try ranked voting like some US states do to avoid a run-off.
The system the Brits use right now works just fine in a two-party system, but it can be extremely non-representative in a multi-party system. There are bound to be many areas where the MPs’ views are very different from those of the majority of the voters in their districts and who won with a very small percentage of the vote, and that is not very representative.