Keir Starmer will neither face a formal no-confidence motion from within the Parliamentary Labour Party (requiring ≥82 MP signatures) nor publicly announce his resignation before 2026-05-24.

Base rate for a sitting Labour leader in government to face formal PLP challenge or resign within any given 14-day window is approximately 4% (historically near-zero; only one instance of PLP no-confidence reaching a vote under Corbyn 2016, and he survived that and won the subsequent membership ballot; voluntary resignations under direct pressure within 14 days are without modern precedent). All four frameworks independently converge on the same directional prediction at individual confidence levels of 0.67–0.81 — a rare and strong methodological signal. The frameworks disagree on mechanism (class interest vs. knowledge problem vs. liquidity preference vs. institutional rules) but agree on the outcome. The institutionalist framework, assigned the highest weight, provides the most operationally precise mechanism: the formal nomination threshold, quorum trap, and asymmetric switching costs collectively make formal action impossible within this window absent an exogenous catalyst. Austrian and Marxist frameworks add complementary mechanisms (patronage pricing, bond market veto) that further discipline the PLP. The Keynesian paradox — that the Rayner ultimatum itself delays action by injecting uncertainty and creating a wait-and-see pause — is a unique and well-supported insight that increases confidence in survival beyond what formal-rules analysis alone would predict. Adjusting upward from the 4% base rate to 78% survival confidence (i.e., ~22% formal action probability) reflects the strength of four-framework convergence while leaving room for exogenous shock risk that structural frameworks systematically underweight.