I'm afraid I haven't followed this committee, but I have heard of this idea.
There are two views on this. The first view is that your name or your identity shouldn't factor into the decision. The second view is that if somebody is successful already, why don't we give them more money, because they have already been successful? The answer is that maybe that person is really good at getting grant money. Is there a link between getting grant money, for instance, and success? Some people are just really good at doing grants. There's a sort of magic to it.
I think there is a debate to be had here as to whether this would make a difference. I suspect that it really depends on the level of funding. Funding for Ph.D. candidates is not the same thing as funding for mercenary researchers. If you are a Nobel Prize winner and you have a big lab and you ask for money, that makes sense, because you probably have a few dozen papers and we know who you are. If you are only starting out, maybe that's different. I'm agnostic, but I think it really depends on the level of funding we're talking about, and perhaps also the subject field of research.