It wasn't only DMR who ignored "all of the fairly detailed commments" you made above, Richard Bridge; everyone else did, too. I am about to rectify that.

Of your 9 points, 4 is the most important. Since most wannabe MPs want to be in government rather than be backbenchers, and since toadying to whips and ministers is the way to get that preferment, then they toady away, instead of holding the government to account. Whilst the government is drawn from parliament, this is bound to happen. Hence, separation of powers is essential. All else, from reforming expenses to PR, is mere tinkering at the edges.

I disagree with your last point, that the House of Lords should be reformed. I don't think that the zeitgeist would permit anything but an elected second chamber; and the quality of the elected Commons shows what that would be like. The Law of Unintended Consequences implies, in this case, "Let well alone." (And I think it is well, as you yourself admit it can be the Nation's conscience.)

Some of your points I do not understand. What, for instance, is the significance of, "Parliamentary rules should become enforceable at law?"