And if we've created too many universities that are trying to be the same, what the impact of that is on innovation ecosystems when every university is chasing similar measures of success, if it's ranking, if it's research intensity, and if it's commercialization?

There's a number of questions there, I think.

But the Australian system was developed in the Dawkins reforms of the 1980s, which was the unified national system, which some people say is the uniform national system, which basically sets the funding rules, sets the metrics, the expectations of universities.

Like all universities have got to do research, for example.

So they're basically one funding formula, one method of research assessment, one ranking letter, or one type of ranking letter.

There's half a dozen ranking systems.

And institutions tend to copy what they're rewarded for.

And can we expect a university in regional Australia or Western Sydney or Central Melbourne to maybe play very different roles if we'd start funding and measuring them in different ways? Would they then also behave differently? Would the outcomes be better?