
Llinos Medi: MP on her first year representing Ynys Môn
In the 12 months that have passed since her election, she has repeatedly urged the Government for clarity on its plans for a new nuclear power station on the island at Wylfa, requested emergency government support after the Port of Holyhead's closure due to storm damage, called for devolution of the Crown Estate in Wales, voted in favour of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, and made her debut appearance on BBC's Question Time.
Reporter Matthew Chandler met Ms Medi last week to reflect on her first year in Parliament.
LM: It's quite amazing how quickly the year has gone. I would say in this last week or so, I've started to feel like I've got my head around the building, the expectations of me in the chamber, and of the mechanisms of this place.
But it's about how you strike the balance, because I am here to represent my constituents, and when the workload is so heavy here, and you're not in your constituency enough, that isn't good, either.
Sometimes, constituents contact me wanting to meet with me, and I've got to push them back a few weeks. I'm uncomfortable about that, especially when they're about serious matters.
I still feel new here, and I think I'll still feel new for the next three years.
Llinos Medi (first from left) with her Plaid Cymru colleagues in Westminster (Image: Submitted)
LM: It's totally dependent on the workload here. The last three weeks, I've been in London much more than on the island.
I've had to make decisions to go home midweek to meet some constituents who had serious matters that I needed to speak to them about. So, it's been quite challenging to get the balance right.
Sometimes, you make the decision to stay in London, and then you're in the chamber for four hours and are not called to speak, so you've not been able to contribute.
Being on Ynys Môn is really important, because I need to be able to be in touch with the people on the island.
LM: I would say the amount of emails and casework we get at the moment shows that we are accessible. We have had lots of good outcomes through our casework for individuals on the island.
We have surgeries, and have tried to arrange them in small rural villages, as well - not just the towns - so that people there feel they're accessible to them, too.
Also, the fact that I live on the island, I know the people there, I've brought up my children there, I've spent 43 years there… hopefully, that increases accessibility, as well.
LM: There was one piece of casework where the outcome on someone's quality of life was dramatic. She worked for a charity and had asked for support for some work she was doing.
I was at an event, and this individual came up to me and just gave me a massive hug. I had to hold back tears, because I knew my team and I were able to have a dramatic impact on somebody's future.
There have been other instances; somebody came to me and thanked me for helping with his benefits - his words were: 'I've been trying for 10 months, and you've sorted it in 10 days.'
There are other stories, where you meet people for whom the system just hasn't worked. They're trying so, so hard to succeed in life, but every barrier has been put in front of them, and the state hasn't supported them. Obviously, I have empathy for them.
Sometimes, people have just said to me: 'It's so nice that you understand how I feel.' One person said: 'You've given me the strength to be able to just battle through for a few more weeks.
It isn't about social media, or having pictures taken, it's about having that direct impact on someone's quality of life.
It's a team approach. I've got an amazing team on the island; my staff are very experienced, so I'm really, really lucky.
Having that knowledge of what's going on in your constituency impacts what you say and do here in London, and definitely motivates you more. It's always the most vulnerable who usually don't have a voice. I want to make sure they feel they have somewhere to turn to, and someone who can support them.
LM: Definitely. We all understand that the spend is increasing, and that we need to manage that. I totally get that.
But you don't take away a lifeline and expect people to just be able to manage. That's ridiculous.
Plaid Cymru have opposed Labour's welfare plans from the start, as we could see the dramatic impact they would have on our communities.
Poverty exists in our communities, and disabled people feel its effects worse than anyone else. pic.twitter.com/mXxduD0h3B
We know poverty is worse in Wales, and is 10 per cent higher among disabled people than in England. Some people use Personal Independence Payment (PIP) to plug the gap for housing allowance, so what you might have is more homeless people - so the state will be paying for homelessness.
They are trying to make out that they're going to make these savings, but in reality, it will cost more in the end. They're talking about getting people into work, but there's no clear plan about how they're going to help the employers to give those jobs.
I just find it really short-sighted. It just looks like sums on a paper, without any work done on the impact and the additional costs. It's giving with one hand and taking away with the other.
It's not just for people out of work, either. Some people use their PIP to pay for public transport to get to work.
We asked for a Welsh impact assessment because of the deprivation in Wales. Especially in areas like ours, where maybe some of the jobs are just seasonal work, it isn't as easy as they make out.
LM: Devolving the Crown Estate would just give us parity with Scotland. It gives you an extra lever on how you want to spend.
By 2029, child poverty will be at nearly 35 per cent in Wales. One country in the UK where it's coming down is Scotland - it'll be 19 per cent by 2029.
We've seen Wales' natural resources being drained from our communities, and the profits going with it… the only thing that we're asking for is that we have the profits in our hands, to be able to spend them in a way that will benefit our communities, and poverty is one of them for us that could have a dramatic impact.
Child poverty is just one example of what you could do with that. It is a problem for us all, because where children are in poverty, their educational outcomes are lower, so it becomes a long-term issue.
The government has tried to say that devolution of the Crown Estate would fragment the market. My amendment was for a two-year transition, anyway, and Scotland hasn't seen any fragmentation of the market.
This is a very weak argument. What they do know is that Wales will be producing a lot of energy, but they want the profits to go back to the treasury.
LM: I'd say that's quite challenging, because you've still got that same narrative there.
I was speaking to a young person last weekend who had lost his job, and his initial thought was: 'Oh gosh, I'm going to have to move away.' But when he started looking, he got a job instantly (on Ynys Môn).
LM: I did - it was because of this narrative. I think we've told our young people to think in that way. We need to make sure that everything is aligned on the island for our young people.
You will still hear me going on about Wylfa. I'm on the nuclear energy All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) and the small modular reactors APPG, and I'm vice-chair of the marine energy APPG because of Morlais (tidal energy project). I'm still in contact with the local authority, Stena Line and the Freeport, and am constantly in contact with Menai Science Park (M-SParc).
LM: The decision on Sizewell C (a £14.2billion Suffolk nuclear plant given the go-ahead by the government in early June) is a positive step forward, because this government has shown they are in support of new nuclear, and have made financial decisions to show that support.
What I'm still doing now is pushing the government to give us a clear indication on what they think is going to happen at the site so that we can prepare ourselves.
If Wylfa comes, I want to make sure that we as an island, and also North Wales, maximise the benefits of the development. To do that, we need to work together and plan ahead.
The skills side is one thing, the supply chain is another. How do we make sure that local businesses can get into the supply chain, and can benefit and thrive? They can offer apprenticeships and grow as businesses, as well.
We just need that clear indication from the government that they will develop on Wylfa, and then we need a timeframe. As it is, people are disheartened.
LM: I do now. The last question I asked Ed Miliband (secretary of state for energy security and net zero), I felt his response was much warmer towards me.
The energy minister (Graham Stuart) has said himself in the chamber that I've raised this several times, so they definitely have heard me.
I think I've been heard, but what we want is the government to understand the importance of giving us that clear indication, so we can plan ahead and can fully benefit from Wylfa when the decision is made.
LM: I now have an office on the island which we struggled to get, and hopefully, it'll be opening soon.
We've got a phone line, and our email system, but it's not an exaggeration to say we have thousands of emails. We try our best to be accessible.
LM: I still feel, when I'm in that chamber representing Ynys Môn, that I've been given an amazing job to speak on behalf of its people.
What I've got the most pride in is my accent. When I'm stood there, I think about the young children of Ynys Môn hearing their accent in that chamber.
That's we why have democracy; so that we're represented by people from our communities.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
11 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Tim Davie must consider his position
The BBC says it should never have broadcast the vile rants of Bob Vylan at Glastonbury and should have cut the live stream when he started chanting 'death to the IDF'. So how did it happen? It has emerged that BBC director-general Tim Davie was himself at Glastonbury on Saturday afternoon and whilst ruling that the performance should not subsequently be available on demand, did not pull the livestream from iPlayer. Where were the protocols to ensure anti-Semitic political propaganda was not sent out unexpurgated on the airwaves, courtesy of the long-suffering licence-fee payer? And if such rules existed why were they not enforced by Mr Davie? The incident could not have come as a surprise. Glastonbury attracts all sorts of preening, self-absorbed nonentities who think they have a monopoly of moral and political rectitude. Surely someone at the BBC must have done their due diligence and suspected that an act like Bob Vylan, which revels in controversy, would land them in it. They knew of the risk because an on-screen warning was issued about the 'very strong and discriminatory language'. At the very least, BBC executives should have insisted upon a delay allowing editors to switch coverage to another act in the event of a nauseating stunt of the sort we witnessed on Saturday. The Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy told MPs she wanted to know why this act was broadcast live by the BBC and the feed was not cut. 'I want explanations,' she said. Now that we know that Mr Davie was intimately involved in this disastrous episode he must consider his own position.


The Herald Scotland
14 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Lisa Nandy hits out at BBC leadership over Glastonbury live stream
It came after rapper Bobby Vylan led crowds at the festival's West Holts Stage in chants of 'free, free Palestine' and 'death, death to the IDF (Israel Defence Forces)' on Saturday. Ms Nandy said the Government is 'exasperated' with the 'lack of account from the leadership', as MPs from across the chamber called for accountability. Bobby Vylan performing at Glastonbury Festival (Ben Birchall/PA) In a statement on the BBC and Glastonbury, she said 'problems with broadcasts' at the festival 'should have been foreseeable'. Labour MP Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) said: 'How are Jews such as myself, in this country, to be reassured about the editorial processes of the BBC? And who on Earth will be held accountable for this error?' Ms Nandy replied: 'He makes an extremely important point about accountability, and that is something that is not lost on me as the Secretary of State, and something that I've impressed upon the BBC leadership as well. 'When you have one editorial failure, it's something that must be gripped. When you have several, it becomes a problem of leadership.' Conservative former minister John Glen said: 'I think we all in this place understand the fine editorial judgments that the BBC and their staff have to make, but this is of a completely different order, and when people are losing faith in the great institutions of this country, could I urge the Secretary of State, in her follow-up conversations that … the BBC actually identified accountability to individuals?' He added: 'Somebody didn't follow that guidance, and I think the country expects people to be held individually to account for why they fail to do their job properly.' Ms Nandy replied: 'I think people do expect people to be held to account for the way that they do their jobs, be that on the front line or at senior levels. It's a point that I've made to the BBC. 'They will have heard what he said and what (Mr Prinsley) said as well about accountability, and it's a point that I will continue to press.' Jim Allister, TUV MP for North Antrim, described the live stream as 'an appalling pro-terrorist broadcast', adding: 'The BBC deliberately chose not to cut the broadcast, perhaps therefore it's time for Government to consider cutting the licence fee?' Ms Nandy replied: 'He will know that this Government supports the BBC. We believe it is an important institution. 'That is why we are so disappointed that this has happened, why we have been so exasperated with the lack of account from the leadership, not just about this, but about a previous Gaza documentary and a number of other issues as well. 'The BBC is one of the most important institutions in our country, and that is the reason why it is held to the highest of standards.' Conservative MP Dame Caroline Dinenage, who chairs the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, said: 'I wonder if the Secretary of State could say what explanation the BBC has given for why this live stream wasn't cut? 'Now it can't be for lack of staff on the ground. They took a reported 400 people to Glastonbury at the weekend. What were they all doing?' Ms Nandy replied: 'I think she's right to raise the question of what the number of staff who were present at the Glastonbury Festival, or working on the broadcast, were doing. 'But I do think this also raises very, very serious questions at the highest levels of the BBC about the operational oversight and the way in which editorial standards are understood and reflected in the decisions that are made by individual staff.' Shadow culture secretary Stuart Andrew called for an independent inquiry, claiming the BBC 'has repeatedly failed to call out antisemitic rhetoric, when it emerges under the guise of political commentary, and has faced serious allegations of minimising attacks on Jewish communities'. Ms Nandy replied: 'What I want to see from the BBC, and I know he shares this, is rapid action to make sure this cannot happen again.' She also claimed an Independent MP was 'aligning himself with antisemites'. Ayoub Khan, MP for Birmingham Perry Barr, had accused the Government of 'hypocrisy' because it did not make a statement when Israeli football fans 'were chanting 'death to all Arabs'' in November last year. Ms Nandy said she 'could not disagree more', adding: 'I think every member of this House will utterly condemn chants of 'death to all Arabs' – it's disgusting and disgraceful.' She continued: 'The reason I have brought a statement to the House today is because our national broadcaster, which is funded by the licence fee, which is paid by the public in this country, has broadcast something that is deeply, deeply offensive to a community in this country, that has made many, many people feel and may actually have made them unsafe. 'Can I just say to him that as a longstanding supporter of justice for the Palestinians, he does nothing for the Palestinian cause by aligning himself with antisemites.' In a point of order, Mr Khan said: 'At no stage have I said in my question or statement that I was aligning myself to anyone at that Glastonbury event.'


The Herald Scotland
15 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Chagos deal cost is ‘going rate for best defensive real estate', says ex-FO boss
The independent crossbencher, a former ambassador who headed the Foreign Office from 2015 to 2020, spoke in support of the agreement in the face of strong objections at Westminster, with opponents branding it a 'surrender' and 'gross folly' funded by the public. The deal signed last month after long-running negotiations, started under the previous Tory administration, returns sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, but will see Britain lease back the strategically important military base on Diego Garcia. It follows a 2019 advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice, which said the UK should cede control. As well as establishing a £40 million fund for Chagossians expelled from the islands, the UK has agreed to pay Mauritius at least £120 million annually during the duration of the 99-year agreement, a total cost in cash terms of at least £13 billion. The Government, however, estimates the bill will be lower at around £101 million a year, while critics argue it will be much higher. The deal could also be extended in the future for an extra 40 years, provided agreement is reached. In a recent report, the House of Lords International Agreements Committee (HLIAC) said although 'not perfect', the treaty must be ratified to avoid legal challenges that could threaten UK control of the military base. Its members warned Mauritius was 'likely' to resume its campaign to secure a binding judgment on sovereignty against Britain unless the agreement was approved and concluded the Government 'cannot ignore' the risk of an 'adverse ruling' putting Britain's right to run the joint UK-US site in jeopardy. Speaking at Westminster as peers debated the controversial accord, Lord McDonald said: 'The most damaging blow to any country's international reputation is a justified charge of hypocrisy. 'The United Kingdom stands for the rule of law in all circumstances. We lose credibility when we seek exceptions to this principle for ourselves.' He added: 'Opponents dislike the expense of the deal. 'Well, we're paying the going rate as a tenant for a base in the wider Indian Ocean, somewhat more than the French in Djibouti, but we're getting more for more. 'Diego Garcia is the best defensive real estate in the whole Indian Ocean. 'Even though £101 million per year is a lot, it's a lot less than the Americans pay to run the base. 'It's a joint base, and we're paying our way in the joint effort.' Lord McDonald also disputed the agreement would bolster China's presence in the Indian Ocean, arguing that 'our partner in Delhi looms much larger in Mauritian calculations than our challenger in Beijing'. He went on: 'Confronted by a charge of double standards, some opponents of this agreement shrug their shoulders. They think they can get away with it, tough it out. But that is what the powerful and unprincipled do. That is what Russia does.' The peer added: 'It gives the UK and our American allies a secure presence in the archipelago for the next 140 years. 'It enhances our security and restores our reputation as a country respecting international law, even when inconvenient and costly.' But Tory shadow foreign minister Lord Callanan said: 'This agreement amounts to a retreat, a surrender of sovereign territory that serves as a linchpin of our defence architecture at a time when authoritarian threats are rising and alliances matter more than ever. 'Handing control to a government who align themselves ever more closely with Beijing – a regime that actively undermines international norms and our national interests – is not only unwise, it is positively dangerous. 'To compound the error, the British taxpayer is being made to foot the bill.' He added: 'This whole affair has been a gross folly. There is no strategic gain here, no credible guarantee for the future of Diego Garcia and no reassurance for our allies. 'Instead, we send a message to adversaries and allies alike that British sovereignty is indeed negotiable. It is capitulation and we must reject it.' Pointing out the Tories in office had opened negotiations to cede sovereignty, Liberal Democrat Lord Purvis of Tweed said: 'The treaty is a consequence of now completing the previous Conservative government's policy.'