To what extent does the U.K. suffer from a democratic deficit?

On one hand, one might suggest that the United Kingdom does suffer from a democratic deficit. The U.K. does not hold a codified constitution with an entrenched Bill of Rights, as seen in the United States, which leaves ordinary citizens’ rights in some part vulnerable. Secondly, the first past the post (FPTP) electoral system can be viewed as a highly skewed process, whereby political Parties are penalised for having widespread yet underlying support bases. For instance, the UKIP party won over 12% of the vote in the 2015 general election, with support coming across the country, however, only secured one seat. In contrast, the SNP secured 56 votes from a 4.7% vote share, indicative of the importance of voting concentrations. Moreover, in instances when a government wins an enormous majority, the inferiority of the House of Lords allows what has been known as an ‘elective dictatorship’, whereby the government’s majority is so large that they can pass almost any bill with ease. This was shown, not least, by Tony Blair’s 197 seat majority in 1997 that arguably facilitated the way towards Britain’s fast-tracked plunge into the Iraq war.However, a more sophisticated argument would recognise that the U.K., in truth, does not suffer from a democratic deficit. Whilst there are limitations to the FPTP system, the electoral process is generally an effective mechanism for delivering strong, majority governments into Westminster, despite recent Conservative experiences. Moreover, whilst the UK does not enjoy an enshrined Bill of Rights, it has enshrined its human rights into national legislation, which is coupled with effective judicial autonomy and an extensive freedom of press, speech and association. All forms of political parties are tolerated and diversity in opinion is publicly celebrated and debated. Moreover, the elected officials are held directly accountable by the people on a regular basis, as the population are provided with free and fair elections every five years, as an opportunity to openly support or dethrone its current government, based on a transparent review of its prior performance.