parliamentary supremacy Watch

Oh, this was actually one of my favourite topics. Just think of it like this, parliament in theory is free to do whatever it likes but over time constitutional changes like joining the EU and the HRA have limited parliament to what it can do. For example, The Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (Dripa) 2014 was deemed illegal under EU law and arguably a violation of human rights so although it passed through parliament (who in theory is the supreme law marker) it was overturned by EU bodies. There are many examples but all the question wants you to do is
1) explain what parliamentary sovereignty is
2) explain what devolution/hra/eu is and the effects it has on our 'uncodifed constitution' (they love that term)
3) make points about the effects, e.g why is it good? Why is it bad? Is it more or less democratic/representative? Does it give or take legitimacy from parliament? Without them, would parliament have too much authority resulting in a tyrannical government?
4) conclude. Say what it's done, say if it's positive or negative and finally if conclude if it's more or less democratic and make sure you point out due to the uncodifed constitution, parliament still remains sovereign. It can revoke devolution and exit the EU, at a big cost tho. (I can imagine dissolving the Scottish parliament would lead to huge support for independence)

I'd argue that going up the ladder like the EU is less democratic and less representative but stops parliament overstepping the freedom of the people.
And I'd argue that going down (devolution) is more democratic and representative. Not sure if I've gone into enough detail but this is literally most of what you need to know.