Back when I was doing some research on this topic, I found only one contemporary jurisdiction that used something like the TDG. There was a rural council in northern English where the residents elected about 30 representatives and then these 30 elected the decision-making council. In other words, the residents did not directly elect their own council.

The political scientists "fixed" this system. They used the fact that voter turnout (for the first tier) of about 25% as a sign that democracy was weak in this district. So the first tier was abolished and then the residents directly elected their council.

The political scientists, in that paper I had read, were happy. But there was nothing in the paper to suggest the rural residents were discontented in the first place with their former rural council (or maybe better said "more discontented than residents of other jurisdictions with direct elections." I couldn't find any research that the rural residents were less discontented after the change or voter turnouts were higher. But I didn't look that hard; I suspect there was none.

If you have more insights into this rural UK matter, let me know.

So far, Canada seems to be keeping governance sane and somewhat wise. But Trumpism is moving north. Anti-mask, anti-vax protests are starting to go beyond freedom: these people don't want to give other people a mask/vax choice. It becoming less of a scientific issue and more of a political tribe issue.

While the Westminster system has its flaws, there is also rising discontent with democracies using proportional representation. I do not see this system as a system that will move humanity forward.