Outgoing UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer was accused of "gaslighting the nation" during his resignation speech outside Number 10 Downing Street.

The controversy centers on the accuracy of the Prime Minister's final assessment of the British economy. Because the resignation occurs less than two years [1] after he took office, the dispute over his legacy reflects deeper tensions regarding the government's actual impact on national finances.

Emily Carver, a contributor to Sky News Australia, criticized Starmer's assertion that the economy was in a better position at the time of his departure than when he first assumed power. Carver said the claim was "absolute nonsense."

"He was gaslighting the nation," Carver said. "He said the economy was in a better place than when he came into power, which is absolute nonsense."

Reports on the specific nature of the "gaslighting" vary among observers. While Carver focused on economic data, other reports suggested the accusation stemmed from claims regarding a "one-in, one-out" migrant deal that some critics described as grossly exaggerated.

Starmer's departure marks a brief tenure in the role of Prime Minister. The speech delivered on Friday served as the official conclusion to his leadership, though the reaction from critics suggests a polarized view of his administration's achievements.

“He was gaslighting the nation.”

The accusation of 'gaslighting' highlights a significant gap between the outgoing administration's self-perception and the perception of its critics. By challenging the Prime Minister's economic narrative, opponents are attempting to frame his short tenure as a failure, ensuring that the historical record of his leadership is contested rather than accepted as stated in his final address.