The federal government won’t push through legislation to establish an Indigenous voice to parliament if a referendum fails but the prime minister is instead focusing on ensuring its success.

Calls for more details on the proposal continue, with Shadow Attorney-General Julian Leeser threatening to withdraw his support without it. 

But Mr Albanese said details on the question were released last July and he had personally met with Opposition Leader Peter Dutton on the matter more than five times.

“I released what Australians will potentially be voting for, a draft question and draft constitutional change,” he told ABC News. 

“There hasn’t been any suggested changes to that draft from the coalition and they have had more than six months.”

The prime minister said following a successful referendum to establish a voice, parliament would decide how the advisory group would operate.

“The voice won’t be a funding body, it won’t be an administrative body … it will simply be an advisory group,” he told Seven’s Sunrise.

“Its advice doesn’t have to be taken but it does have to be heard.” 

Asked if the government would push through legislation if the referendum failed, Mr Albanese said he was rather focused on ensuring a successful vote. 

Meanwhile, senior cabinet minister Tanya Plibersek cautioned Australians not to confuse the status of the proposed Indigenous voice to parliament.

“This is a voice, not a veto,” she told Seven.

“It will be a chance for Australians to talk about the sort of nation we want to be in the future … and get more practical delivery of healthcare and education and so on for First Nations Australians.”

Ms Plibersek said the conversation about the proposal was well underway and a picture of what it might look like was gathering detail.

Yet Mr Leeser said the opposition had been reasonably asking for detail since the election but received little.

“The government is in danger of losing me because I just don’t think they’re listening,” he told ABC radio.

“I’m really trying to get them to listen to the reasonable concerns that people are raising.”

But founder of the Cape York Institute and From the Heart Advisory Group member Noel Pearson called the demand for detail a concerning diversion. 

Mr Pearson said detail would be in legislation made by the parliament but the referendum was about the constitution. 

“It’s the parliamentarians who have the responsibility to come up with the detail,” he told ABC Radio.

“The Australian people are being asked to vote on a constitutional amendment. All of the power lies with the parliament and it’s a complete diversion to demand these details.”

The National Party confirmed last year it would not support the referendum, a move which led to lower house MP Andrew Gee deciding to leave the party and join the crossbench.

Nationals Leader David Littleproud said his party did not have malicious intent in not supporting the voice but believed it would add more bureaucracy to closing the gap.

“We have members of parliament that actually have lived experience on these communities … the biggest disadvantage is in rural and remote areas,” he told Sky News.  

“What we’re saying is another layer of bureaucracy will not change this.”

Mr Pearson said reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians was at stake. 

“If this referendum is kiboshed through game play and a spoiling game by the opposition we will lose the opportunity, I think, forever,” he said.

By Maeve Bannister in Canberra

Get local, national and world news, plus sport, entertainment, lifestyle, competitions and more delivered straight to your inbox with the Canberra Daily Daily Newsletter. Sign up here.