This article is part of the Iris Ethics Knowledge Base; you can find a directory of all articles here.
Meeting conduct
HREC meetings should, as far as practicable, enable attendance of all members in the minimum membership categories, either in person or via available technology (NS 5.2.3). Meeting papers should be provided sufficiently in advance to enable members to be fully informed (NS 5.2.4).
At Iris Ethics, meetings are held online and asynchronous on a secure, Australia-hosted collaboration platform, with document access restricted to the Panel and Secretariat. On this platform, Panel members make comments and discuss matters relevant to decision-making.
The Secretariat observes discussion and mediates interaction between the Panel and applicants. Where a Panel member raises an issue requiring clarification from the applicant, the Secretariat engages with the applicant directly through the Iris Ethics application portal or by other means of communication.
Decisions must be informed by an exchange of opinions from all members participating. Where full attendance is not achieved, the Chair must be satisfied that the views of absent members have been received and considered before a decision is made (NS 5.2.5).
The Chair and Deputy Chair may convene the Panel in a collaborative discussion, to which applicants are invited by the Chair, or an in camera session for further discussion of decisions and recommendations.
Where a member can no longer participate in a meeting, they may provide written comments in lieu of continued attendance. At least five members must still be participating, including one representative each of the Chair or Deputy Chair, a community member, and a researcher/evaluator familiar with the types of proposals normally reviewed by the HREC. Before a decision is made, the Chair must be satisfied that the views of members who are not present have been received and considered by the Panel.
Applicants may be asked to provide further information as part of the meeting or in response to a Panel decision. The Secretariat engages applicants through the Iris Ethics application portal, or by email where this is not feasible, so that decisions are made with the fullest information available.
Deliberation and decisions
The primary mode of deliberation is asynchronous discussion on the collaboration platform, moderated by the Chair and/or Deputy Chair. The Chair may call a collaborative discussion or an in camera session to expedite decision-making or clarify information that cannot be resolved on the platform.
The National Statement requires a review body to try to reach decisions by general agreement or consensus; voting is neither required nor prohibited, and any dissent, together with reasons if requested, must be recorded in the minutes (NS 5.2.8). At Iris Ethics, the goal of a meeting is a consensus decision on the ethical acceptability of an application. Where the Panel does not reach unanimous agreement, Iris Ethics' own procedures provide that the decision is carried by a two-thirds majority of the Panel, provided the majority includes at least one member acting as the community representative; any significant minority view (two or more members) is noted in the minutes. This threshold is set by Iris Ethics' Terms of Reference and operating procedures, not by the National Statement itself.
The Chair has final responsibility for the decision to end deliberation of the Panel and prepare a recommendation.
Delegation
The HREC may delegate some responsibilities to its chairperson, individual members, a sub-committee, or administrative officers (NS 5.2.9); at Iris Ethics this is typically the Secretariat and/or Managing Director. Appropriate delegation includes expedited review of amendments and routine monitoring correspondence (NS 5.2.10). Actions taken by delegates are not equivalent to HREC decisions; the committee retains responsibility for determining which actions require ratification.
Record keeping
The HREC must maintain a complete record of all research proposals received and reviewed, including applications, approved documentation, and relevant correspondence (NS 5.2.19-5.2.20). See Record keeping for specific requirements; at Iris Ethics this is handled by the Secretariat.
This page was last updated on 16 September 2026.
Was this helpful? We'd appreciate your feedback!
This article makes reference to the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2025. It is intended as practical guidance and does not constitute legal advice.
AI Disclosure: Resources in this library were prepared using Large Language Models with input from Iris Ethics staff who guided the scope and design. Subsequent revisions and final versions were developed and approved by Iris Ethics staff.