Which G7 leader will leave next?

**Stage 1 — Blind analysis (ignore current market prices):**

The public record provided states that Sir Keir Starmer announced and formalized his resignation on *22 June 2026*, immediately putting him into a caretaker role while Labour selects a new leader (nominations opening 9 July, closing 16 July, potential installation ~17 July). The question asks which G7 leader will be the *first* to leave office; the provided timeline places Starmer's exit firmly on 22 June 2026. I therefore treat the factual claim of Starmer's resignation date as the key determinant. No competing G7 leader is reported to have left prior to that date in the supplied context.

Key reasons this produces near-certainty: resignation is a definitive, dated, observable event; the caretaker designation is standard and does not negate that he has *left* active leadership responsibilities; and the provided account explicitly notes no other G7 leader had left earlier. Allowing a small buffer for reporting error, definitional quibbles (e.g., whether 'caretaker' status equals 'left office'), or oracle/resolution disputes, a tiny residual chance remains that the market or official adjudicators interpret the sequence differently. On balance, the independent probability that the UK Prime Minister was first is 99%.

**Stage 2 — Market calibration (look at market prices):**

Current market: Yes 98%, No 2% (top-contender breakdown shows Keir Starmer at 98%). The market price is essentially aligned with my independent assessment (99% vs 98%). This close alignment suggests the market has incorporated the same public facts and that liquidity and trading pressure have driven the price near certainty. The small gap (1 percentage point) can be explained by:

- *Procedural/settlement uncertainty:* some traders may be pricing in a tiny chance of a contested resolution (dispute over what counts as 'leaving office' or an oracle timing issue). - *Arbitrage and friction:* even when the outcome is known, markets sometimes lag due to transaction costs, funds locked in hedges, or human oversight. - *Conservative rounding:* some participants hedge against reporting errors or reversal of announcements.

Given the very high event volume and the close match between my independent view and the market, I believe the market is properly priced within rounding and operational uncertainty. There is no actionable mispricing beyond that negligible margin unless new, contradictory evidence appears or the market’s oracle resolution rules create ambiguity about the definition/timing of “left office.”