@DMcG. Government leads the agenda, government leads the house. Parliament is there to dispute, refute,or pass legislation. The Lords is there to review legislation with a fine tooth comb. They may propose amendments, not prevent legislation.
There is an old maxim no taxation without representation. Turn this around and you come up with the idea that only an accountable body can inflict legislation on the house and subsequently on the electorate, not an un-elected rabble. The courts have no role in parliament, that is the role of parliamentarians.
Had the corrosive speaker not enabled, and had the PM retained the remit to call an election this circus of the last few months would never have happened.
The electorate voted out in the referendum.b Certain   MPs thought to frustrate the will of the people. The people are sovereign-not parliament. Those that disputed this concept are now cast to the four winds. Rightly so.
Next the meddling Courts need to be put firmly back in their place and prevented from playing politics ever again. This would be best achieved by dismantling blairs supreme court and revering to past practise.
It is not a question of the courts or parliament restricting the government of the day, it is a clear question of preventing either body ever subverting the government again. If Parliament disagrees with the government they can topple it if powerful enough. The ballot box within parliament or the ballot box of the electorate has alays resolved these questions in the past.
No one should ever try to ride roughshod over the people, or try ti frustrate a government carrying out the wishes of the people.
This election has writ this principle in letters large.
The arrogance that was Soubry,Anna Soubry, David Gauke, Dominic Grieve not onlt were booted out by the PM but infinitely more satisfying booted out by the electorate.
The only lesson to take away from this is that the people will not be denied.