The Facebook video shared by Dallas Brodie shows a Vancouver protest with signs including “STOP THE WORLD CUP OF DISPLACEMENT” and “NO FIFA ON STOLEN LAND.” Brodie’s point is blunt: David Eby’s government keeps presenting reconciliation spending as certainty, partnership, and social licence — yet the conflict does not disappear.

The province has already promoted FIFA World Cup 26 as an economic opportunity. In its April 2024 update, B.C. estimated gross core hosting costs for seven Vancouver matches at $483 million to $581 million, with projected visitor spending of more than $1 billion between 2026 and 2031. Later Global News reporting said the province paid $18 million to Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh, with each receiving $6 million, and raised questions about what deliverables or conditions were attached.

That is exactly where OneBC’s message cuts through. British Columbians are not wrong to ask what taxpayers are buying. Are they buying transparency? Are they buying public consent? Are they buying clear deliverables? Or are they funding a political performance where costs rise, agreements remain hard to scrutinize, and the same protest slogans keep appearing in the streets?

Supporters of the World Cup can argue the event will bring tourism, jobs, and global attention. Fair enough — make that case with full numbers. But when government money is attached to reconciliation branding, host-city obligations, public security, transportation, stadium upgrades, and politically sensitive land acknowledgements, the public deserves more than slogans.

Brodie’s value here is not that she opposes fun, sport, tourism, or visitors. It is that she is willing to ask the uncomfortable question Victoria avoids: who pays, who benefits, and what happens when the promised “partnership” still produces public conflict?

The OneBC accountability standard should be simple: no blank cheques, no hidden deliverables, no public money without public answers.