So, while the EU may currently model "ideal" law for Parliament, it is Parliament who has the ultimate power to legislate. The second external restriction on Parliament is the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The ECHR was enacted in 1953 and meant to protect the basic human rights of all citizens of European nations. This act permits the citizen of any country to bring a case before the ECHR court and should the action of the nation be found in violation of human rights, there is a penalty applied to that nation and whatever law violated the right must be removed (Ovey 50). So, similar to the EU issue, this limitation would seem to remove power from Parliament, however, it is removing power that in actuality Parliament never had, the power to violate inherent human rights.

In recent years, there has been one primary internal limitation placed on Parliament, that limitation is the concept of devolution. Britain is governed exclusively by Westminster, and decisions made by Westminster directly effect the entire country. This model in recent years has been considered less effective than those nations which use a separation of powers system, where individual states have sovereignty over most governing issues and must only submit to the Federal government where required by the Constitution. This idea of separation of powers is gaining force in Britain and many are proposing that a separation of powers should take place in Britain essentially limiting Parliament's power solely to law making and giving equal power to the courts and an executive for the enforcement and interpretation of the laws; however, according to most legal critics, the system would never be compatible in Britain and therefore must not be implemented (White 473).

Britain has a rich history of Parliamentary rule and proper law making under this rule. However, in recent years, many have questioned the effectiveness of this traditional method in the modern world. While there still remains the question in many minds as to Parliament's overall power and...

These checks and balances are obviously a severe limitation on any sovereign nation's power, but for the time being, appear to limit that power in ways meant to protect their citizens from the government as a whole. To some extant there is talk and consideration that certain sovereign nations may abandon the EU practices, and this is especially being considered now that a policy exists for such exiting, for now at least, the nations have made their peace with the EU's rules and procedures. While one can argue that this would be better accomplished by simply separating out the powers of each nation, there is also greater concern for the existing precedence the reconstruction of which would be the equivalent of redrafting the Magna Carta.
Works Cited

A.V. Dice. Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution. 1885.

Chrimes, SB. "English Constitutional History." Oxford University Press. 1967.

Haughwout Folsom, Ralph, Lake, Ralph B., Nada, Ved P. European Union law after Maastricht: a practical guide for lawyers outside the Common Market (2nd ed.). Kluwer Law International. 1996.

Himsworth, C.M.G. "In a state no longer: the end of constitutionalism?" Legal Jounals Index. 2012.

Lakin, Stuart. "How to make sense of the HRA 1998: the ises and oughts of the British constitution." Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. 2010.

Northern Ireland Parliamentary Report. Vol. 2. 1922.

Ovey, Clare; White, Robin C.A. Jacobs & White: The European Convention on Human Rights (4th ed.). Oxford University Press. 2006.

Pocock, J.G.A "The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law." Cambridge University Press. 1987.

"Sources of European Union law." Europa. 2010.

White, Richard. "Separation of powers and legislative supremacy." Law Quarterly Review.…