http://www.meaby.co.uk/category/legal-news/
A reasoned summary:
If ministers take issue at the law of privacy, for example, then they should reform those laws through statute and not sabotage the court’s interpretation of the very law that parliament itself enacted.
An interesting example towards the end of the linked article:

In 1996, A’s MP specifically referred to the names of A and her children and their address whilst making unsubstantiated and derogatory comments about them in a parliamentary debate. A sued the government. In A v UK 1998, judges at the European Court of Human Rights acknowledged the importance of parliamentary privilege but also stated that freedom of speech should uphold the principle of fairness. In doing so, they appeared to raise the question of a means of compensation for those defamed or whose privacy has been invaded.

"It is time that the UK adopts a more measured approach to parliamentary privilege than that given by Article 9 of universal protection so that there is greater control over what is currently an unchecked power."