meh, could be worse, could have the american system. that looks very dodgy.
The Americans also use FPTP, but the problems with that electoral system are less pronounced there because they only have two major political parties, at least at the federal level. Although the 1992 Presidential election also shows the shortcomings of their system as Ross Perot won almost 20% of the popular vote yet achieved absolutely no electoral college votes.
If you want a government to really change things (be it Conservatvie or Labour or even the Lib Dems) then they need to have the mandate to do so.
I reject the notion that you need single-party majority governments to change things, and I say that as someone who lives in a country that hasn't experienced such a thing in my lifetime. It's a threat perpetuated by large parties in the UK so as not to undermine their power. It requires more work and a willingness to compromise, but those aren't bad things to ask of people who control the destinies of millions of lives. If anything, Thatcher's ability to wreck the economies of whole regions of the UK so long as she maintained support among 42% of voters is the perfect example of the dangers of single-party rule in parliamentary systems.