Senate defamation

In the conclusion to his speech to the Senate on bill S-4 on Sept 7, 2006, Prime Minister Harper said:

In conclusion, I would like to read a quote from a book I reviewed recently. On page 206, the author writes, and I quote:
"Probably on no other public question in Canada has there been such unanimity of opinion as on that of the necessity for Senate reform."
The author is Robert MacKay.
The book is The Unreformed Senate of Canada.
The year is 1926.
Honourable Senators, this institution, the Senate of Canada, must truly change.
And I hope you join us, the Government and the Canadian people, in being a constructive partner in that change.
Passage of S-4 would be a modest move forward.
And after that, we will continue to move forward with further proposals.
- As part of our plan to give Canadians the accountable, democratic institution they desire - and deserve.

Why does he imply that the Senate has not undergone any change since 1926? I cannot bring myself to believe that he is not aware that:

In 1927, Canada's highest court ruled that women could sit as Senators. Four months later, the government of Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King recommended for appointment Canada's first female senator;

Since 1965, newly appointed members may not sit in the Senate after reaching the age of seventy-five; and

Since 1985, the Speaker is authorized to appoint another Senator to take his or her place temporarily. (This last change appears minor, but is significant in that it allows the Senate to continue functioning despite the absence of the official Speaker.)

Despite the fact that there have been many attempts at revamping the senate, all of which have failed, it drives me nuts to witness deliberate misinformation. All the more so since it originates from the most influential office in Canada.

There are many other reasons why Senate reform should be pursued. Why did he choose to invoke such an outdated assessment? Why doesn't the Senate sue the PM for libel/slander? Now THAT would be exciting!

(sidenote: this came close:

Bellavance, “Senator Files Defamation Suit against Bloc MP," A8. In April 1998, then Bloc Québécois MP Jean-Paul Marchand sent his constituents, at taxpayers’ expense, an anti-Senate leaflet in which certain Senators, myself included, were named as collecting a House of Commons pension along with their Senate salaries. In response, I launched a defamation suit in Québec Superior Court. Senator Céline Hervieux-Payette, who was also smeared by the leaflet, filed a similar action. Mr. Marchand later apologized, calling his own actions “a deplorable mistake.” Eventually, he agreed to pay an out-of-court settlement. On the other side of the chamber, former Senator Ron Ghitter (PC – Alberta) successfully filed suit against Rob Anders for remarks made by the Calgary MP in a Reform Party fundraising letter.

Unfortunately, despite any possible excess of self-interest, I really don't think the Senate has enough influence to compete against Harper and the best lawyers oil money and tithing can buy.

sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Senate
http://www.sen.parl.gc.ca/sjoyal/Joyal's%20book%20docs/Introduction%20(Eng).htm