Sir Keir Starmer is down to his last wicket in the worst batting collapse since England versus Australia in Adelaide in 2006, when nine wickets fell for just 60 runs.

The media are asking: Will Andy Burnham stage a coup? Will Wes Streeting aim for No10?

Or will the Prime Minister, Starmer himself, simply throw in the towel and step aside? Whatever happens, this Government lacks energy and drive. Starmer is in office but not in power.

Questions over Lord Mandelson linger. It now looks as if Keir Starmer knew, or ought to have known, more before Prime Minister’s Questions last Wednesday, and is covering up and, as so often, the cover-up causes the greatest damage.

When I knocked on doors in North East Somerset, people didn’t ask for fixed-term parliaments or AV. They asked who had elected him to be Prime Minister.

The Constitution may be clear that we can change Prime Minister as often as His Majesty sees fit, but the mood of the country is for that constitutional evolution.

The reason I quote that speech is not some egotistical trip.

It is to show you, the viewers, that this isn’t an opportunistic argument because Keir Starmer is in trouble. It is a fundamental evolution of the British system.

We have shifted into a more presidential style, and voters’ choice of leader has become fundamental to how we elect Governments.

That became clear with Gordon Brown’s refusal to call an early election in 2007, which undermined him, and again in 2022 when, after Boris Johnson resigned, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak both struggled to govern because they lacked a popular mandate.

The Prime Minister’s legitimacy comes from the people, not a cabal in Parliament.

So here is Andy Burnham’s reported plan: to enter Parliament by a friendly seat or one vacated by an incumbent, be hailed as Labour’s hero, and assume the leadership.

This is a fantasy that the public will not tolerate someone parachuted in as Prime Minister without a national mandate.

Any by-election would ultimately be a referendum on Labour and on democracy, and voters would almost certainly reject both: the party for its incompetence and for the attempted stitch-up.

If Keir Starmer went without a general election following, Labour would then be governing without legitimacy.

A new leader parachuted in, Andy Burnham or otherwise, would face the same problem Rishi Sunak did: a majority but no mandate, and therefore no ability to govern.

MPs might try to ignore it, but the public would resent it, and governing would become almost impossible.