How many of us with a keen interest in politics have daydreamed of one day running for Parliament? I know I have. My juvenile fantasy of becoming the president of the United States was scuppered from the start by being born in South Australia. So, my childhood goal switched to being prime minister of Australia. Reality, as is so often the case, is turning out to be a little more modest in scope.

The previously defunct Family First project was resurrected in July 2021 by two former Labor ministers in South Australian governments, the socially conservative Jack Snelling and Tom Kenyon. Both of these ex-parliamentarians were shaken by the recent passage of abortion-to-birth legislation. They called their new political initiative the Family First Party (FFP). The idea is to unite the Evangelicals supportive of the original incarnation of Family First with traditionalist Catholics and, indeed, conservatives of every religious and non-religious persuasion.

I could never bring myself to sign up for the Labor party as a young idealist in his twenties or the opportunistic Liberal party thereafter. As an old idealist, I joined the FFP in a heartbeat. And now I find myself in the unlikely scenario of challenging former deputy premier Vicki Chapman for the House of Assembly seat of Bragg. My task, a tad less grand than my White House fantasy, is to capture four per cent of the vote and help the upper house candidates for the FFP to secure a seat or two.

The FFP has not had the time or funds to contest the federal election, and so all its energy has gone into having an impact on South Australia’s 19 March state contest. The primary goal is to win seats in the Legislative Council. Joining Kenyon on the ticket is Deepa Mathew, a well-known (former) Liberal identity in South Australia. The Kenyon-Mathew ticket encapsulates, amongst other things, traditionalist Labor joining forces with conservative Liberal.

The seat of Bragg, located in the leafy eastern suburbs of Adelaide, always backs the Liberal candidate even if the party – or the candidate – has been on the nose. The Liberal party can count on more than 60 per cent of the electorate voting for them come rain or shine. Chapman, for instance, attained 63.1 per cent at the state election in 2018, which converted into a whopping two-party-preferred vote of 67.4 per cent. So why waste my time and risk my reputation on mission impossible?

Partly because I have lived in Bragg for 24 years and partly because I don’t like political shenanigans – where Chapman, to put it politely, has form. Last year a parliamentary inquiry found a conflict of interest between her role as a Minister of Planning and Local Government and her ownership of a property on Kangaroo Island. The cross-party investigation recommended she be found guilty of contempt of Parliament for misleading the house. Chapman subsequently resigned as deputy premier on 22 November, 2021, but everybody knows she will be back on the front bench if Premier Marshall’s Liberal government is re-elected on 19 March.

Vicki Chapman, after all, is a much more powerful figure in the local Liberal party machine than the awkward and diffident Stephen Marshall. It was she, as South Australia’s attorney-general, who steered through Parliament radical new laws on prostitution, euthanasia and abortion-to-birth. The next item on her agenda, once she returns to Cabinet, is prohibiting independent Christian schools from hiring staff based on religious principles.

The formidable Chapman is also a key powerbroker of the so-called ‘moderates’ – more accurately, perhaps, ‘radicals’ – within SA’s Liberal party. As political commentator Caleb Bond has pointed out, ‘The South Australian Liberal party is almost entirely run by moderates. Bit by bit, they have taken control of the party… there are almost no conservatives left in the parliamentary Liberal party in South Australia’.

The immoderation of the Liberal moderates reveals itself in an administration that has over the past four years blown out the state budget from $11 billion to $33 billion, half of that increase occurring before Covid-19 struck. In what sense does that make Marshall’s government centre-right?

It is a similar story with the pandemic. The Liberals are yet to revoke an emergency decree that went into effect over eighteen months ago, a decree that has allowed Premier Marshall to hide behind the edicts of Chief Public Health Officer Nicola Spurrier and Police Commissioner Grant Stevens for way too long.

Meanwhile, the FFP explicitly opposes mandatory vaccination, while supporting vaccination programs.

A genuine concern for many conservatives is that a vote for minor conservative parties is a vote for Labor. Stephen Marshall, picking up the theme, claims that FFP preferencing in two northern Adelaide electorates could tip the balance in favour of the Labor candidates, although he conveniently forgets to mention that FFP preferencing in two adjacent electorates could have the opposite effect. Marshall also omits the fact that a voter can preference whomever they want.

The Marshall administration can choose to run roughshod over conservatives, though it does leave us with a conundrum. Who, exactly, should we vote for if the options are: (1) a progressive Liberal candidate such as Vicki Chapman; (2) a progressive Labor candidate; or (3) a progressive Greens candidate? This, obviously, is a trick question since the answer is (4) Daryl McCann, candidate for the Family First Party.

If history is anything to go by, Marshall’s Liberals will narrowly win a second term in office. The Family First Party could gain one or maybe two seats in South Australia’s upper house. This development, hopefully, should disabuse some in SA’s Liberal party of the smug view that conservatives have no alternative but to support them.

Spare a thought for me on election night, 19 March, as I struggle to make the 4 per cent quota, approximately a thousand votes. Anything above that might give the obdurately progressive Vicki Chapman some pause for thought. Such an ambition falls somewhat short of winning the keys to the White House or the Lodge – and yet somebody has to do it.

Maybe I will console myself with this William James insight: ‘Act as if what you do makes a difference. It does’.