The centre of political attention: Ontario PC leader John Tory is banking on a pragmatic mix of fiscal conservatism and social progressivism to win back power for the Tories.

Alawyer and Progressive Conservative activist, John Tory won the leadership of the Ontario PC party in 2004 and entered the Ontario legislature as leader of the Opposition the following year. Tory, 53, now faces his biggest political challenge: a general election scheduled for Oct. 10. He talked with Western Standard's Terry O'Neill about the looming electoral battle.

WS: You've entered the summer in a dead heat with the Liberals. What's going to put you over the top on Oct. 10?

John Tory: I think if you want to pick an overriding theme as opposed to an issue, it's going to be credibility. I think in the end, [Liberal Premier Dalton] McGuinty has so far said, for example, "I will not raise taxes in my next mandate if I get one." And I would say, this is the same man who said he wouldn't raise taxes last time, and brought in the biggest tax increase in Ontario history. He said he would close the coal plants by 2014. This is the same man who said those same coal plants would be closed by 2007. So I think credibility is going to be a gigantic issue.

You've put your stamp on the party through a new policy document that is seen as moving the party to the centre. Do you see it this way or do you see your party as small-c conservative?

No, I see it as a party that's in the centre. There are elements of me that are very conservative when it comes to how carefully you manage the money and how you govern yourself in terms of fiscal policy. My commitment to enterprise is that, in the end, it's the only thing that can produce the prosperity so that we can then decide on how properly to allocate, in terms of sharing that wealth among the population. On community safety issues, I'm very conservative. But I have a huge social conscience.

You've talked about the need for "one law for all." Is this a reference to aboriginal blockaders?

People often assume that, but of course it's not. I think you could name other examples. For example, the present government has failed to appoint adequate numbers of justices of the peace, and this has resulted in massive numbers of charges being dropped or withdrawn by the Crown ... I think that breeds disrespect for the law and, in effect, sets up two classes of people, one who live in a place where you do have JPs, and you'll get to court and be convicted, and another one where you don't. Have I commented before on the fact that the one-law approach has some application to these [aboriginal] blockades and protests and occupations? The answer is yes. I don't believe any group of people, regardless of who they are, should have the right in our society to take the law in their own hands if they have a grievance.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

In response to the murder of Toronto student Jordan Manners, many Ontarians called for tougher gun-control laws. Do you agree?

I don't think there would be a soul in the world who would say that in an ideal world you would have people with guns out on the street ... except perhaps in the holsters of police officers.... But I think the people who [call for even more gun control] are leaping to what appears to be an attractive but overly simplistic answer, because in the end, the majority of guns that are being used in committing offences are guns that are being illegally smuggled into the country. I make the point that cocaine is banned, too, but it doesn't mean that people aren't using it.

Finally, are you in favour of the federal Conservatives' plan to reform the equalization formula?

Yes. And the reason I am is that I think it reflects what has to be the reality, which is that you cannot have a situation where you have Ontario willingly supporting equalization, as it always has, but having it ever get to the point where Ontario is making its willing contribution and the net effect of that is to make Ontario less well off than some of the provinces receiving the money.