Yes, that's right.
I would say two things about that. The first has to do with the quota system, which I just talked about. Simply increasing the number of scholarships without changing how they are awarded would likely widen the equity gap. Also, as I said earlier, the regions need a solid ecosystem that takes into account local and regional realities. Other witnesses talked about how important that is in relation to tourism and the green economy.
The concentration of funding, which we regularly criticize, jeopardizes the richness of the research ecosystem across the country. Since 15% of universities already get 73% of the grants, doubling the number of grants will just give a handful of institutions a few more grants, at the end of the day.
For example, the Alliance of Canadian Comprehensive Research Universities represents all small- and medium-sized universities, so 56% of university students. However, it gets nowhere near its share of grants. The current system doesn't take into account the diversity of the country's universities, some of which serve distinct populations with distinct financial needs. In UQ's case, nearly half of our students are what we call first generation students, meaning they are the first in their families to attend university. Research grants enhance the training opportunities that lead to a highly skilled workforce.
Having a system that gives these students access to scholarships is paramount because excellence isn't confined to one place. It exists in every region. Quotas are needed so that, at the very least, all universities receive a certain number of grants that they can allocate across the main areas of research to build local scientific expertise in response to the challenges identified by local organizations.