I'd be fine for abolition, but if a stronger committee system was established in its place - one that would give individual MPs more say on bills. The committees are usually fairly good at being civil forums of discussion (as compared to the House or Legislative Assembly), as long as opposition parties are given a proper role. Committees of MPs then could be given more control of the agenda and have more legislation originate at that level.
I concur with Alvin, I don't support provincial appointment of the Senate. I am not either a fan of an elected senate, triple E or otherwise.
If we keep it, it should then be a regional appointment (instead of by province, for the smaller ones) selected not just by the Prime Minister but also the opposition leaders (or how about party caucus or even memberships) based upon that region's popular vote as vacancies open, with 10 year max limits. For example, the Atlantic Provinces have 30 seats. If there are 6 vacancies, they are allocated to the parties based on their support in that region. So the Conservatives might get to pick 3, the Liberals 2, and the NDP 1. Currently many Senators are old party bagmen or political favours (Mike Duffy, for example) or for defeated MPs or those who gave up their seat for a star candidate or a leader, though the last Liberal government put some decent people in there, like Romeo Dalaire. It might mean though that people will be selected for better reasons if they are scrutinized. We might also be able to get a Green Party senator before we get a Green MP. Parties could select potential senators in advance at their conventions, or by popular vote of the members.