Remember the time when we were all getting fed up hearing about the upcoming EU referendum? There came a point when, regardless of what we wanted the outcome to be, we just wanted it over and done with, to settle the issue and move on.

If only life were that simple. Nearly four months have passed since David Dimbleby immortalized the words, “The British people have spoken and the answer is: ‘we’re out’.” But, as we know, the formal process of leaving the EU hasn’t even been triggered yet – and won’t be until the end of March 2017. As Theresa May and her colleagues finalise the government’s negotiating position, it’s clear that Europe will dominate our politics for some time to come.

The dividing lines of the referendum itself are, however, increasingly irrelevant. Re-hashing the Bremainer versus Brexiteer argument will get us nowhere. People (like me) who would have preferred to stay in the EU need to accept that a broad democratic decision has been taken. We are leaving the EU. Those who voted to leave the EU, however, also must accept that the democratic process did not stop with the vote on 23 June. Democratic decision-making is, at its best, about finding common ground. That requires keeping options open for as long as possible so that proper consultation, preparation and deliberation can take place.

The specifics of leaving, complex and daunting as they are, will be the most significant task facing our democratic institutions in living memory. How will the government interact with Parliament? How will Westminster interact with the devolved legislatures across the UK? And how does the referendum result sit within our existing constitutional framework?

Let’s start with what’s happening inside the Westminster bubble. The Conservative Party Conference appeared to signal a new direction in the governing party’s thinking: Theresa May gave the strongest hints yet that as far as she was concerned ‘hard’ Brexit was going to be the only show in town. Border control would have to take precedence over single market access.

‘Not so fast’, responded the recently-appointed Shadow Brexit Secretary, Keir Starmer, along with a number of the Prime Minister’s increasingly jittery MPs. His deft performance at the Despatch Box last week drew cross-party support, arguing not that Parliament should reject June’s referendum decision, but that Parliament should be properly consulted on the government’s negotiating position. In other words, it’s not for Mrs May to unilaterally decide what she wants Britain’s terms of exit to be. If Brexit was fundamentally about ‘taking back control’ to restore the notion of parliamentary sovereignty to our democracy, then it would make sense for Parliament to assume this role.

To make matters more complicated, however, Britain is no longer a purely unitary state. Westminster isn’t where all decisions are made. In accordance with referendums in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the UK has been governed in a devolved manner over the last 17 years. The Houses of Parliament at Westminster may be at the pinnacle of UK decision-making, but Cardiff Bay, Holyrood and Stormont are all important, democratic centres of power in their own right.

In Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon is embarking on a very smart strategy. Looking at the polls and the lack of a discernible shift in support in favour of independence since June, the First Minister cannot be confident that she would win another independence referendum if it were held tomorrow. Indeed, even if she did, it would hardly be on favourable terms. All of a sudden, Scotland (assuming it were to stay in the EU), would share a border with a non-EU state (assuming it would leave the single market entirely). Instead, Sturgeon appears to be taking a longer-term approach: try to put pressure on London to keep the UK as a whole in the single market in order to lay more favourable conditions for her party to mount an independence argument further down the line.

In Northern Ireland, our devolved government lacks a strong negotiating position. Today in the Assembly, the two main parties of government supported different sides of an SDLP motion arguing that Northern Ireland should seek some sort of ‘special status’ in a new relationship with the EU. Sinn Féin supported the motion; the DUP opposed it. In a narrow 46-47 vote, the motion was ultimately rejected by MLAs. With news that Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, James Brokenshire, will not sit on Theresa May’s Brexit Cabinet Sub-Committee, Northern Ireland as a region hardly starts with a strong bargaining position from which to influence the outcome of negotiations between Britain and the EU.

Influencing the agenda matters. Keir Starmer knows this. Nicola Sturgeon knows this. Northern Ireland’s political leaders know this too, but they haven’t yet decided what exactly their agenda should be. If they want to stand up for Northern Ireland’s interests in the forthcoming Brexit negotiations, they would do well to find common ground with each other.

That means keeping as many options on the table as possible for as long as possible. Time is running out, of course. If Article 50 were triggered tomorrow, it is doubtful that Northern Ireland’s unique interests would be adequately served in any UK-EU negotiations. The DUP and Sinn Féin have found a common purpose in the past. It matters now more than ever that they do so again.