If you are granted an ADR, the lawyer does not speak to the panel, but should be there to listen and gather information for the hearing in the event that your ADR is not successful. And I expect your lawyer would be at the hearing representing you, or why else would you have a lawyer? And from other people's experience in this forum, your lawyer should be preparing arguments on why your case should go to ADR, as it is a much shorter process, and less adversarial. I'm not sure whether your lawyer would be able to listen in to the ADR by telephone, or whether transcripts of the ADR would be made available to you and your lawyer.
I missed the chance for ADR, and am still waiting for the hearing, so I can't speak from experience. But I think if a hearing is required, your lawyer would probably have to go to Edmonton. They are not so advanced yet that they are able to bring in people by video conference like Skype or QQ - they ask for prepaid phone cards so they can telephone the applicant during the hearing. Even if they allow your lawyer to participate by telephone, it is more effective if you can look people in the eye, and make use of body language.
As your wife resides in Edmonton, your hearing would be in Edmonton, where the wait times are usually longer. From what I hear, they only come up from Calgary to Edmonton only 6 times a year, whereas they are year-round in Vancouver. This may all be different now, as the new government has put some money into reducing the backlog in spousal sponsorship.
I think you are also able to ask to have your case heard in Vancouver, if your wife is able to travel to Vancouver. In that case, you might be better represented by a lawyer in Vancouver, as he/she would be more familiar with the IAD and CBSA people doing the hearings in Vancouver and their particular biases. Also, the lawyer wouldn't have to travel. Again, just my opinion, as this is not the route I had chosen - although I might have, if I had known about it earlier.
Good luck, however you choose to proceed. But I think the above poster is right. Your lawyer should be advising you on procedure, and options available to you. If they are not giving clear answers, or being evasive, I would question whether they have your best interests at heart. Or it might be a red flag that they don't have sufficient experience to be familiar with the process.