How PEI Premier Robert Ghiz may have poured cold water on the senate abolition movement

Thanks to the recent senate expense scandals, I think it's fair to say that there is a growing movement of people who want to see Canada's Senate abolished.

There are certainly a lot of 'abolish the Senate' petitions out there — here, here and here.

[ Related: MPs need to go further to ensure expense scandals don’t happen again: taxpayer watchdog ]

But here's why it likely won't happen — at least not anytime soon.

It appears that Prince Edward Island Premier Robert Ghiz has launched a new round of the constitutional horse-trading that we saw during the Meech Lake and Charlottetown negotiations of the 1980s and 90s.

In an interview with the Globe and Mail, Ghiz suggested that he wouldn't vote to abolish the Senate without the guarantee of something in return — something like more seats in the House of Commons.

As explained by the Globe, Ghiz's comments are timely.

Later this week, the Supreme Court of Canada will hear the Harper government's reference asking what it would take to reform or abolish the upper chamber. The Tories would like to pass Bill C-7 which would incline provinces to hold elections and impose a nine-year term limit for senators.

Many constitutional experts have said that reform would likely require the consent of 7 out of 10 provinces, representing 50 per cent of the total population. Some have even suggested that abolition would require unanimous consent of all the provinces.

[ Related: Senate suspension aftermath sheds light on the upper chamber’s blunders ]

But with Ghiz's latest comments, it's clear that abolishing — or even reforming the Senate — sans any other changes to the constitution is going to prove to be a difficult, if not impossible, task.

PEI — with a population of about 140,000 people — wants more seats in the House of Commons, what about Quebec — what are they going to want?

Ned Franks, a constitutional expert at Queen's University, recently suggested that this could be a repeat of the 80s and 90s.

"[A push for abolition would] become very quickly part of a larger constitutional reform package, and that would ultimately lead into the decay and destruction of recent efforts to reform the constitution," Ned Franks, a constitutional expert at Queen’s University, told the National Post.

"They just are not profitable. You wind up pitting group against group."

A note for those that weren't around during the Meech Lake and Charlottetown debates: if the government does choose to reopen the constitution, buckle your seat belts it's going to be one bumpy ride.

(Photo courtesy of the Canadian Press)

Are you a politics junkie?
Follow @politicalpoints on Twitter!