Well it seems when it comes to the Voice to Parliament, we know 'when' but still not 'on what' the Australian public will be voting.

Fair enough if you missed the announcement too, because typically speaking politicians don't try to make any real noise about anything during the post-Christmas malaise.

It was at the Woodford Folk Festival on the 28th of December that the Prime Minister announced to the world that by the same time in 2023 a referendum on constitutional recognition would have been held.

"When Woodford takes place next year, the referendum on the Voice to Parliament will have been held.

"A successful referendum will give respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples but it will also enhance both the way that Australians see ourselves and the way we are seen by the world," he said to those gathered for the annual cultural and music festival held just over 70km north of Brisbane.

The Prime Minister standing on a stage in a black polo and Akubra returned to the tone of language which has elevated the nature of what he's advancing to the hallowed ground that the Voice represents a moral and social responsibility to do and be better.

"We live in the world's greatest nation, but an even greater Australia is so tantalisingly within our reach. This can indeed be an inclusive moment of national unity and reconciliation... I encourage Australians to consider the generous and gracious request from First Nations people themselves."

The Prime Minister has indicated our nation is less than a year out from a referendum on constitutional recognition. The trouble is that we still really don't know what we're voting for.

There can be no denying that the overwhelming number of Australians want to right the wrongs of the past. In my own state, Western Australia, we have the most support for the voice than any other mainland state in the country. Yet outside this intent, it would appear that more than half of us still don't know or are undecided on what it is we're voting for.

It would appear that we're hungry for change, we just don't know what it is precisely that's going to attempt to satisfy our appetite.

Time and again there have been emotive videos, leading national figures and commentators reinforcing the concept of a Voice to Parliament. Yet when asked what it will look like, how will it operate, how can we ensure it will actually improve the lives of Indigenous people we're effectively told "leave it to the parliament to fill in the blanks".

Indigenous Affairs Minister Linda Burney likened the vote as a much more simplistic choice. "Effectively asking do we need a bridge to cross the Sydney harbour: yes or no"; with the Parliament to decide "how many lanes on that bridge".

That argument, I'm afraid, is flawed.

We're being asked to leave the details of the Voice to the politicians, when the whole starting point of why we need a Voice is that the politicians haven't got it right for Indigenous people since the British arrived.

If we're going to get this to a vote, then this will be a busy space and require a high degree of attention from each voting Aussie to help satisfy their questions and concerns. At such a late stage, and less than 12 months is a late stage, we still don't know.

Even to the point of derision from members of my own party, I've been pretty open about how much I have liked the Prime Minister's speeches around the Voice. They are more eloquent and reflect the nation's emotions more fully than I've ever seen in my lifetime but if we're going to build this bridge in less than 12 months, it's about time we knew what it looked like.

Zak Kirkup is the former leader of the WA Liberal Party