The opposition has not yet declared its formal position on the Voice but has spent months asking questions about its operation,inviting accusations that it is deliberately talking down the Voice to harm Albanese.

The Liberals are unlikely to reach a formal position on the Voice at their party room meeting on Tuesday,raising the possibility they may not declare their stance until after the budget in May.

As Albanese emphasised to his caucus last week,the constitution has never been changed in a referendum without bipartisan support,highlighting the importance of the party’s referendum battle lines being drawn before the vote,likely to be held in October.

The proposed design of the Voice,expected to be tabled in parliament this Thursday,would allow the body to give independent advice to the parliament and the government,and make proactive representations as well as respond to requests for advice.

Conservative critics are particularly alarmed that the body would be able to consult directly with executive government,which refers to ministers and the public service,as well as making representations to parliament.

Albanese also fired back at questions from journalists about whether the Voice would,in theory,advise a non-government party such as the Greens on a policy such as the safeguard mechanism,which theGreens announced it would support after a months-long negotiation with the government on climate mitigation.

“Of all the very strange questions I have been asked about the Voice,that’s up there. You know,the Voice is about matters that directly affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. That’s what it’s about. And people shouldn’t look for,on the Voice,distractions,” Albanese said in a press conference.

Eminent constitutional lawyer Anne Twomey said the scope of the Voice was broader than Albanese had implied. The constitutional amendment revealed by Albanese last week limited the Voice to advising on matters “relating” to Indigenous Australians,which is slightly more expansive than the definition cited by Albanese.

However,Twomey said the notion that the Voice would have a say in decisions with no particular relevance to Indigenous Australians was a “fantasy”.

She said the Voice would have no legitimacy to advise on policies or decisions that have no specific relevance to Indigenous Australians,such as the RBA’s interest rates decisions or the AUKUS deal. What would fall within the Voice’s remit,she said,was a situation in which an AUKUS naval base was proposed near an Indigenous town.

Cut through the noise of federal politics with news,views and expert analysis from Jacqueline Maley.Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter here.