Forget about Macron’s election having potentially put a stop to the rise of nationalist movements in Europe. Aside from questions of left or right, the reality is that with his election a relatively new dynamic has entered the debate about the EU: in a big and influential member state the traditional parties have been rejected by the electorate. People have made, driven by a whole range of motives, a choice for a fresh leader about whom we don’t know very much yet beyond the broader vision.

The latter is very welcome – a liberal and inclusive society which values social mobility, diversity and the contribution of immigrants, a country which sees its destiny in good relations with its neighbours and other nations in a united Europe, and an economy which offers both flexibility and opportunity to those active and seeking to be active in it: younger and older, employees as much as employers.

To bring this broader vision about requires significant changes within France, but also within Europe. We don’t know the details about the initiatives that Macron may pursue but a lot of people will need to leave ideological truths behind and adapt to the fact that simply by being President of one of the largest economies in the EU, a member of NATO, the G7 and a nuclear power, Macron has bargaining power for his ideas, and he may well find allies within the EU. It is these alliances that will be more important than national positions.

The former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis recently commented that one of the drivers of the Greek referendum on the initially proposed terms for the Greek Bailout was for the Greek government to be able to point to a strong national democratic mandate. In a similar move to the Greek referendum strategy, also Theresa May in the UK argues that a strong national mandate may be able to force the hand of others in multilateral negotiations. Yet Varoufakis reports that his German Counterpart Wolfgang Schaeuble reminded him soon after the Greek referendum that also the (at times contrary) positions of other countries in the Greek bailout negotiations had often strong democratic mandates behind them. The outcomes of the Greek bailout, including the most recent agreements, are not the result of national posturing, however much the media may suggest this, but of painstaking negotiations with many parties.

The reality in Europe with its 28 and soon 27 members is that the mandates of governments change all the time, often not radically, but at times even that, and it is the voices of governments which in combination with the equally changing proportions of MEPs in the European Parliament effectively determine the direction of the EU.

So at the end of the day the challenge of developing a reform vision for Europe is one of accepting and embracing democracy, a process of developing common positions based on debate and majorities which inevitable change over time. Building the necessary alliances and making them resilient to distraction is the art of compromise on which Europe thrives. Britain currently finds it hard to accept that its individual national desires may not gain a majority in the EU, of which it is still a part and that it needs to agree to an exit settlement and after that any new agreements on its future relationship. The UK needs to get real and be open to the fact that it will not determine the outcome for Britain on its own.

But a similar attitude of openness to the bargaining power of others needs to be shown by those who now engage with Macron’s approach to European Reform. He may want to do things differently both to kick-start changes in Europe to make it more effective and democratic, but also to produce more positive attitudes towards Europe on the nationalist spectrum of voters. And these are not just in France.

Insisting that everything in the European financial and political architecture already fit for the future, as some early commentators on Macron’s alleged plans are doing, is not going to help. What will be helpful is to subject any detailed proposals when they come forward to good scrutiny and democratic debate. The newcomer on the EU scene may well have some ideas that make established ways of doing things worth ditching.