Article content continued

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or

Charles McVety, a prominent evangelical leader who enthusiastically endorsed Ford as PC leader, said he was not disappointed to hear social issues would not top the Tory agenda. He said social conservatives will be happy if Ford — should he become premier — merely carries through on his promise to revamp the sex-ed program.

“It’s not who he is, and everybody knows that,” said McVety about social conservatism. “This is a tough, beer-drinking businessman. Not exactly your churchman.”

Based on comments at debates and elsewhere, this is where the new Conservative chief stands on some other issues:

Shrinking provincial spending

Ford has said he will cut four per cent from the province’s $141-billion budget — or about $5.6 billion. He hasn’t offered specifics, but says he will review spending “line by line” and implement efficiency methods like the “Lean” system. The Liberals say those kind of reductions, though, will cost thousands of jobs.

Health-care efficiencies

At one of the two Conservative leadership debates, Ford said he would provide help and “more resources” to the health-care system. But then he said his focus would be on listening to front-line workers to find “efficiencies” and better deliver services. He provided no details.

Abortion

Ford said he would welcome any member who brought forward a bill requiring parental consent before minors undergo abortions, but said he was not angling to revive the hot-button abortion question.

Incentives for business — but not welfare

Ford says he would offer tax incentives — as well as cut red tape — to attract businesses to Ontario, but insisted that it would not be corporate welfare, something he said he opposes.

Merging school-board back offices?

Ford told one debate about how the Catholic and public school boards in the Peel region west of Toronto each had adjacent “Taj Mahal” headquarters. He seemed to suggest the two systems should share administrative functions: “Why can’t they have one Taj Mahal, instead of two Taj Mahals?”