There at the high court. For the next a0 minutes or so, the Bbc News Channel stayed on live pictures of the outside of the courtroom, awaiting what turned out to be a rather brief shot of the duke leaving the building Chris Collins echoed that who thought. We asked bbc news for their response to those points and they told us. Although there were many cameras outside the courtroom, there werent any inside, which meant reporters had to relay what was going on via live online updates or wait till they were outside the high court to summarise what had been said on television. The only visual material of what happened in court via drawings by the courtroom artist, although sky news filmed a ginger bearded actor voicing prince harrys words. Tom boadle tweeted. Well, lets discuss this issue of whether there should be more tv tv cameras allowed in british courts with the legal commentator joshua rosenberg, who, of course, spent 15 years as the bbc� s legal correspondent. Thank you so much for coming on newswatch, joshua. Hello, samira. Just remind us, where are cameras currently allowed in courts . In england and wales you can have some appeals televised, but you dont have trials televised. Theres one exception, which is that its now possible to broadcast the Sentencing Remarks of a judge in a criminal trial by advance arrangement. But normally, any criminal trial, any civil claim like the one involving prince harry, is closed to cameras in england and wales. In scotalnd, it is possible with the consent of everybody involved in the case, but thats very rarely arranged. Do you think it now seems bizarre that were still in cases relying on, you know, those court sketches, or in the case of the sky news, Hiring An Actor Hollywood style, to perform the words . It should be possible to extend the range of cases that can be televised. So, for example, Judicial Review Claims against the government theres one coming up being brought by the government against the Hallet Inquiry Involving Covid 19 that should be televised, no problem at all. The view taken by the judges is that where there are witnesses involved, its difficult enough giving evidence in court in the first place, but the idea that people might be able to watch your evidence and talk to overnight if, as happened in the case of prince harry, your evidence extends over a second day. You know, you go home and somebody goes, i saw you on the television, why didnt you say that . Or you didnt do very well. And so the balance has been struck that appeals can be televised generally, but trials cannot. And i suppose in prince harrys case, there might also have been a legal argument that given the whole case is about media intrusion, it would be inappropriate to then allow cameras in as well. Yes. I mean, he knows perfectly well that every word he said was being recorded, written down, transcripts can be made available, acted out as as youve indicated by an actor and reported in real time. But actually, the idea of people watching him around the world, that might be a bit much for him, and the theory is that its easier for him to give evidence calmly. All right, hes got a room full ofjournalists listening. Hes got the judge listening. Hes got the barristers on both sides. But to actually have a worldwide audience watching, that might make it more difficult for him. And after all, the important thing is for him to give evidence properly, fairly, calmly, accurately and this would just be another strain on him or any other witness. Flipping the point of view, in a sense, is there a case to say, being seen to be done, the public can go into courts and watch people give evidence, that a Tv News Audience would benefit in some way from being able to see a whole trial, even allowing for maybe witnesses potentially being not included . I think thats right, and thats why the judges have allowed this limited entry into criminal cases by allowing Sentencing Remarks. But youre not allowed to see the defendant. You cant see how the person whos been convicted is reacting to the sentence. I think we could extend that. So it is possible for broadcasting, particularly live broadcasting, to interfere with the course ofjustice. But certainly, there ought to be an extension and we have no problem in watching appeals in the supreme court. They can be broadcast live. Theyre livestreamed in the court of appeal. Theres livestreaming available there. Its simply trials where there are witnesses, where its thought this might be wrong, but that may change. Joshua rosenberg, thank you so much. Around 1000 members of the National Union ofjournalists went on strike this week, resulting in the disruption of bbc local news on wednesday and thursday. The dispute, which weve mentioned before On Newswatch Centres before on newswatch, centres on planned cuts in local radio in england, meaning more services being shared among different stations, with bbc managers redirecting budgets to digital services. The proposals were announced last october, but more than seven months on, the two sides seemed this week to be as far apart as ever. The effect of the industrial action was apparent to newswatch viewers with some Regional Television bulletins being dropped and some shown in areas of england, a long way from the region being reported on. 0ne bulletin that did go out was wednesdays late night london news. Good evening. Im Miranda Schenker with the latest in london and the southeast. And welcome to viewers joining us tonight from across the country. But that wasnt quite the latest in london in the south east, in london in the southeast, because, although it wasnt made clear on air, it wasnt live at 10 30pm as normal but pre recorded, and therefore missed a Big London Story the victory of West Ham United in footballs Europa Conference League final that night. Dr liam mccarthy, former bbc local Radio Station managing editor, thought that was appalling. In response, a bbc spokesperson told us. As for bulletins designed for one region being shown in other parts of the country, that left some viewers confused. And wilson wondered. And on the wider issue of the dispute, dave barnes begged. Last week, bbc news got something of a scoop, an interview by Lucy Williamson with the controversial social Media Influencer andrew tate. Shes been reporting on his activities in romania for several months. Tate is being investigated by prosecutors there over allegations of rape, Human Trafficking and exploiting women, which he denies. In the interview, he dismissed the testimony of individual women who have made accusations against him, claiming that one woman interviewed anonymously by the bbc earlier this year was imaginary and had been invented by the bbc. Ive presented you with case after case after case with quote after quote after quote of people who are genuinely concerned about the impact youre having and you brush it off as if its nothing. No, what you have done is come here with an agenda. Youve come here with loaded questions, youve come here with things taken out of context. Youve come here with things that you dont understand are satirical. � s satirical and jokes. Thats how you explain the comments you make. For you to sit down, would you like to apologise for any of them . No apology was forthcoming and reaction to the interview was divided, with anne marie writing. But Gerald Ramshaw thought Lucy Williamsons interview with the obnoxious andrew tate was a masterpiece. We hope to discuss the interview with Lucy Williamson or anyone from her production team, but unfortunately, nobody was available. Thank you for all your comments this week. If you want to share your opinions about what you see or hear on bbc news, on tv, radio, online and social media email newswatch and social media email newswatch at bbc. Co. Uk or you can find us on twitter at newswatch bbc. You can call us on 03700106676 and do have a look at previous thats all from us. Well be back to hear your thoughts about bbc News Coverage again next week. Goodbye. And we begin with the news thats been breaking in the last hour the destruction of a dam in Southern Ukraine. ,. , destruction of a dam in Southern Ukraine. ,. , ukraine. The immediate after maths. Saw thousand ukraine. The immediate after maths. Saw thousand destroyed ukraine. The immediate after maths. Saw thousand destroyed in ukraine. The immediate after maths. Saw thousand destroyed in an ukraine. The immediate after maths. Saw thousand destroyed in an area i ukraine. The immediate after maths. Saw thousand destroyed in an area of Southern Ukraine on the front line of the war with russia. Reports of evacuations of some villages around the dam, so were keeping our eye on that. What do we know about why the dam was destroyed and what could happen next . In the early hours of the 6th of june 2023, Newsbreak Set A dam in russian controlled territory has been breached. Its been a key strategic Dividing Line during the conflict. Water surges downstream towards dozens of towns, villages and the city of kherson. Its starting to rise every second. 0n The Eastern Flank of the river, they spot catalina tracked in her home and try to drop her water. Tracked in her home and try to drop herwater. Herson tracked in her home and try to drop her water. Her son makes the crucial catch. The family are taken to kherson where we speak to them. Translation we managed to find the boat, but my father got carried away in the current was too powerful. Rowing didnt help, so we were left with my kids. Feels like we lived a whole life in just one day. Otherwise, were very grateful to everyone. This road has become a rescue boat for submerged streets. They scrambled to save what is most important to them. You could do this poor woman and this is happening everywhere. People have long chosen to stay. Weve been amazed by their willingness to tough this out. But because of the scenes like this. Because of the waters, the devastation, you wonder if there hand is going to be evacuated north