What is verified

OneBC’s official petition page, published with June 28 metadata, says Brodie will introduce legislation in the upcoming fall session to initiate a public inquiry into the handling of B.C.’s condo bailout. The page asks supporters to sign a petition and links to a June 28 written statement from Brodie.

On X, Brodie criticized the proposal as taxpayer support for Lower Mainland developers and linked followers to the OneBC petition. OneBC’s official X account also posted the petition link and called for an investigation into who benefits. Those are direct movement communications, not third-party rumours.

For broader context, the federal government’s June 19 housing release announced Build Canada Homes and framed the program as part of a national effort to increase homebuilding. That context should be kept separate from OneBC’s argument: the verified fact here is that OneBC is now asking for a public inquiry and says Brodie intends to bring legislation forward.

Why this is a strong OneBC file

The supporter read is simple and fair: if public money, public agencies, or public risk are being used in a major housing intervention, taxpayers deserve a plain accounting of who receives help, why those recipients were chosen, what risks government is assuming, and what safeguards exist.

Brodie’s statement argues that over-leveraged projects should be resolved through price discovery and private-market losses, not by transferring risk to taxpayers. Whether voters agree with every word or not, the accountability demand is legitimate: show the receipts before asking the public to trust another large intervention.

How to track it honestly

• Do not overclaim: no verified petition-signature count, cost breakdown, beneficiary list, or legislative text was found in today’s check.
• Credit the source: this update comes from OneBC’s official petition page, Brodie’s June 28 statement, and Brodie/OneBC X posts.
• Watch the fall session: the real milestone will be whether Brodie tables legislation and what the proposed inquiry terms actually say.
• Keep the taxpayer frame: the strongest defensible argument is transparency — who benefits, who pays, and what risk has moved onto the public balance sheet.

That is exactly the kind of file iVoteOneBC should track. OneBC does not need invented numbers to make the case. A sourced petition, a promised legislative move, and a clear public-interest question are enough.