If I may, I am going to start, and my colleague will be able to add to my answer.
We agree that for any interim hearing, any hearing where it is not necessary to determine the credibility of a witness, an accused or another person, videoconferencing is entirely appropriate. It avoids pointless travel, for one thing. It genuinely is an access to justice measure. We agree on that.
However, what has to be understood is that it is our role, at the Barreau du Québec, to issue warnings. That applies to everything we do. Our concerns always relate to respect for fundamental rights. When a party is testifying, that is when things can go wrong.
I'm going to let my colleague add to my answer if he wants.