National human research ethics arrangements often direct committees must include specified specialist members.  Documents like the National Statement direct that absent members can provide their comments prior to the meeting.  Many Chairs will read them to the committee, so they can inform debate.  This, as Don has depicted, can be a great relief to the rest of the Committee.  But how closely does your institution enforce the written comment rule?  Especially given how hard it often is to recruit good members?  What would the committee do if it lacked the expertise to intelligently review an application?