In the earliest days of conservative government under Harper, it seemed political pundits were extolling the merits of a minority government, since the government was required to cooperate with the opposition.  Additionally, a minority made sure that the government behaved itself and sought moreso to have the approval of the country via inter-party cooperation., since at any time they could be dragged into another election.

We saw this when the government changed its position on deficit spending in the face of world wide collapse.  The opposition demanded it.  The government agreed to go along with them.  Canada took on a 50+Billion dollar deficit to fund direct stimulus. Another issue was Canada's military withdrawal in Afghanistan. The vote in the house was respected by the government, and only when the Liberals became vociferous about it, we stay, -- a compromise plan was made where we would leave military/police trainers.  This was the quintessential example of cooperation in the house.
Because the conservatives formed the government, over the course of half a decade, they  were able to shift the partisan balance in the Senate.  The Senate previously was a lever the Liberals could use to stall legislation, because of all the senators who were appointed by them for decades prior.  Now that they have lost control of the Senate, the opposition have reverted to ruling Canada from the committee. Since all parties are represented in committee, in proportion to their seats in the house, the government is never able to move legislation through the committees.  They are at the behest of the opposition.

These facts bring to an end the effectiveness of minority government in Canada--because government cannot function in the face of  partisan obstructionism on this level.  Legislation is routinely passed in the house and senate, but tied up in committee.  How is that serving democracy?  Parties voting for something when in the public eye, but nixing the same legislation in private.