The UK's own political system is screwed up far more than the EU's. First past the post disenfranchises millions of voters living in safe seats. The votes of a minority of people living in marginal seats matter, so we end up with policies to court them. Older people vote so pensions are untouchable while benefits for under 21s are attacked. The national support for parties (yes, including UKIP) isn't represented in the Commons. The European Parliament's electoral system is actually far fairer. But these are all reasons that people don't feel they have a voice. It's not the EU.
The fact that people have no idea how they can vote for their MEPs, or that they have them, is deeply depressing but not surprising. The irony that so many of our MEPs are UKIP, who then fail to 'represent' us while shouting about how undemocratic 'Europe' is makes me furious.
To go back to the ECJ/Supreme Court issue, is a system where the Government changes the law to frustrate the SC actually a good one? In the recent examples of this I can think of, it's happened after the Court has found the Government is behaving, well, rather badly, and the new legislation hasn't been great. Yes, the ECJ upholds the Treaties, but we were part of the process of writing those treaties, a big part. We are a key part in treaty decision-making, or rather we were. We had extensive opt-outs in legislative areas. Our own governments chose to be more generous on freedom of movement than many other EU nations - just changing to a system fully allowed within the current rules would have met many of the concerns about 'unrestricted immigration'.
Sorry, it makes me so frustrated to have had so many years of misinformation about the EU. I blame our national governments, successive, for not even trying, and blaming so much wrongly on Europe to curry favour with voters.
The EU needs reform but we were brilliantly placed to be a leading voice in future talks.