"I have it here": Sam Dastyari reminds Abetz of his old anti-LGBTI comments. Credit:ABC "You can't sit here and tell us that we need to have more reasonable debate and the tone of the debate when you look at your own history of comments when it comes to this matter," he continued. "Your own history of what you've said in these debates, going all the way back to when you were first elected in 1994. Eric, you argued against the decriminalisation of homosexuality in Tasmania under the guise of some kind of states rights matters… and you have pursued an objection to LGBTI rights throughout. Some of the most hurtful comments that have been said in this debate over 20 years have come from you of all people. "To sit there and talk about the tenor of debate… I have it here. I have it here. Your press release in 1994. I have it here." Indeed he did have it here, and Abetz knew it, as confirmed by his eloquent rejoinder: "Yeah, yeah."

Panellists Jamila Rizvi and Eric Abetz. Credit:ABC Dastyari: "It's titled 'Federalism Perverted to Allow Sodomy and Incest'." It was Abetz using the "fig leaf of federalism", Dastyari said, to argue for bigotry. Abetz gathered himself, or at least gathered the fig leaf about his vulnerable parts. "The federal parliament was seeking to use its foreign affairs power to override the state government. And that was what I was objecting to very, very strongly. And, Sam, I think you and a few other people know that that sort of slur in relation to me is completely wrong and you would know that because you shook hands with somebody in the green room just before this evening and that sort of slur on me does you no justice."

Exactly what happened in the green room was left hanging - being the ABC, one can assume there was some buttered Saladas being handed around by gay communists but viewers were left to imagine the scene. We were left to imagine other things, too. In Dastyari's case, we were asked to imagine - perish the thought - that a Chinese businessman was trying to influence him when it paid his bills a couple of years ago. A questioner wanted to know: "How is dual citizenship a threat to our sovereignty but donations from foreign billionaires are not?" Tony Jones: "Sam Dastyari?"

Dastyari: "Glad to be here." Jones: "Good to have you back." Oh, how he laughed. Jones: "Do you think the Chinese government was trying to duchess you and to bring you on to their side as an agent of influence with all the money they were throwing your way?" Dastyari: "No, no."

Siri Abetz wasn't having a bar of it. "Sam, how you could accept money in a public position for private accounts just defies any standard whatsoever. I'm just astounded that you did it. I just find it - sure, we all make mistakes - how would your donors know that you've got a personal debt other than by waving it in front of them and saying, 'Something has to be paid'?" Something always has to be paid, and right now it is the $122 million bill for the postal survey on marriage equality - and the untold price we will pay for the associated corruption of public discourse. We had a gay couple in the audience who wanted to know why we need to tolerate statements such as those raising the spectre that same-sex marriage will lead to things on the bestiality spectrum. Siri Abetz was engaged in some serious whataboutery, as in What About… "some of the things that have happened for example to the Australian Christian Lobby". He nominated an egging and "the bomb blast that went off" - an incident last year that had absolutely nothing to with the marriage debate, but never mind the facts.

Then there was audience member David Foletta - who insisted on being remembered by kicking off with this: "That's F-O-L-E-T-T-A for the record." Mr Foletta then launched into a rambling personal tale about absent parents that careened wildly into a metaphor making its debut in this debate: "The best example that I can give is when a person is employed as labour hire, then they never have any identity of where they're actually employed. And for a kid to grow up with 18 years of labour hire…" Tony Jones stopped him in his tracks, which was a blessing. The last thing we need is for the marriage argument to join forces with the one over penalty rates, though it wouldn't be the greatest leap being made.