Yes.
Since we're talking about funding today, I should mention in particular that SSHRC didn't have EDI criteria when I submitted grants or when I adjudicated. In terms of excesses of DEI, I've certainly heard examples from people who've submitted grants to CIHR and to NSERC.
A mundane example is that SSHRC currently does allocate some graduate scholarships by race. In terms of EDI, a mundane example is that my own faculty, the faculty of arts and social sciences at my university, has a bunch of different lists. It has a strategic research plan. Other universities have similar ones. One of their three major cross-cutting commitments is EDI. It seems extreme that it's one of the three major cross-cutting commitments.
Hearing people talk about EDI, raising the pride flag, and having it be such an inclusive environment, and then saying, “Oh well, my next meeting is scheduled on Yom Kippur” just rings hollow to me.
When people argue for EDI and say that it's because they want to include everyone and want to have a diversity of viewpoints, and then there are almost no conservatives in academia.... To me, there are potentially good cases for EDI, but if you take them really seriously, you will see that EDI has been a failure in practice. This problem of a lack of conservatives in academia has become much worse in the EDI era of the last 10 years or so.