I don't think it would solve the problem. I don't think removing that criterion would all of a sudden open up a lot of topics for exploration. It may, around the margins, improve things a little bit. You might, for example, see slightly more improved environments for research without some of these EDI bureaucracies, I guess. I think the problem is that you don't have a diversity of different opinions and viewpoints present in the university and in the broader research ecosystem, so I don't think it's really the end-all.
One thing I think we should consider is this endless expansion of more and more grants and types of oversight bodies and more funding bodies. I think we have to ask if government-funded research will always lead to improved economic growth. I don't think there are convincing arguments. I think mostly private sector research drives economic growth. I'm not saying we should have no public funding, but I think we need to have a conversation about what the appropriate amount is. I think removing EDI certainly is one first step.