As for your general comments about the role the Senate plays and whether it's valid, whether it's appropriate in this day and age, I think that's a very valid position. I can respect that position. I think it would be foolish to suggest that's a view that is not widely held by many. I think, unfortunately for the Senate and for all of us who function in this Parliament, there's an attitude of disrespect towards the Senate because it lacks legitimacy. Perhaps the only solution to that is abolition. We still think the approach of fixing it is a better approach. Canadians have been asked in opinion polls, and they're of the same view.
However, support for abolition exists and appears to be growing over time: if you went back to June 2006, abolition was at 31% in an Ipsos-Reid poll and by November of last year the support for abolition had gone up to 46%. That's almost a 50% increase—over the space of two years of this government—in the number of Canadians willing to say that abolition is an alternative they would support. No doubt it is a product of how Canadians have seen the Liberal-dominated Senate conduct itself with respect to a lot of government legislation, and in particular, I think, some of the reform proposals.
That being said, there is a much larger number of Canadians prepared to support the notion of direct elections or some kind of consultation on who they would like to see representing them in the Senate. In four different polls between December 2006 and February 2008, you see a range from 63% up to 79% saying they would support changes to the Senate of that type. There are similar numbers on the question of term limits, which is the subject of the other bill.
I take from that popular indication that the one thing there is virtually no desire for is the maintenance of the Senate as it is now. People prefer, as this government does, to see it changed and reformed, but if they can't see it changed or reformed, they seem increasingly willing to consider abolition.