The rebuffing of Nigel Farage who could have facilitated some kind of political land bridge between the Labour government and the incoming second Trump administration smacks of the kind of petulance we have come to expect from this government, one where the national interest is sacrificed for petty ideological reasons.

Donald Trump‘s landslide victory could bring with it tariffs and trade wars which European countries can ill afford, least of all a country already led by a government determined to scare business away through tax rises.

What with the ideological gap between Sir Keir Starmer and the returning Republican, as well as previous comments made by Foreign Secretary David Lammy no less, now would be the time to accept Farage’s reasonable proposal, eat some humble pie, and look to guard against any economic hit to the UK.

Instead we are likely to see more student politics from the Labour Party, engaging in the kind of moral high-handedness which cost Vice President Kamala Harris the election, as the Democratic ticket lost touch with its blue collar base which cares far more about bread and butter issues like jobs, crime and immigration than “the state of democracy”, trans rights, or even abortion.

Sir Keir’s Labour ought to be similarly mindful as three-way marginals start to open up nationwide, especially in northern and coastal areas, that rather than benefit from any split in the Right-wing vote, his party could find itself losing directly to Reform UK as the latter wins over working class concerns over the economy, migrants and crime.

Like it or not, the UK is stuck with Labour until 2029, and The Donald is likely to be in office until the start of that year as well. We therefore have a direct timeline overlap between two ideological opposites which nevertheless will lead each other’s strongest ally. Can Britain really afford to be at loggerheads with Washington until the decade’s end?

In the end, the UK is in no position to cope with a trade war, on top of Rachel Reeves’s tax raid as well as an economic policy which is fast scaring away foreign investment. In addition – given the rise of China – the UK needs to work closer than ever with the US when it comes to military and intelligence cooperation.

Having a Foreign Secretary in office who has previously call Trump a “woman-hating, neo-Nazi-sympathising sociopath” and a “profound threat to the international order” is hardly the best of foundations for all of this.

Hence accepting Farage’s offer would not only help smooth the path, but could even be clever politics for Labour as it seeks to win over wavering Reform supporters at home. But no. Alas the Labour government’s petulance seems to be winning out, preferring to point score with its North London base rather than put the interests of the UK front and centre.

Make no mistake, economically and militarily, this is set to be a bumpy half-decade. The last thing Britain needs is an ideological and political gulf with its closest ally, sacrificing historic bonds on the altar of political dogma. Farage’s offer should be reviewed by Labour and reconsidered at the earliest possibility.

Eating humble pie would do this government some good. Love him or loathe him, Trump is back, and the UK will have to work with the new Commander-in-Chief. The UK cannot afford to be caught up in trade wars and economic hardships. It seems that Sir Keir and co are already costing Britain dearly, first on the budget and now in refusing help to smooth the path with Trump.