I'd much prefer a taxable benefit than a means tested one.
Why? Because *next year* I am going to have low income, but child benefit based on *last year's* income.
If you get UCCB, it is taxed on *this* year's earnings. It makes way more sense to me.
Say wifeypon goes on a year long maternity in January. Made a reasonable amount of money, but some self employed, the previous year. Pops a sprog in Dec.
From June that year she will get new child benefit based on the previous year, not the current low income (maternity EI) year. With UCCB, you get all the money, then have to pay back whatever in addition to your other tax the following year.
It's even worse if for whatever you don't get EI - you have zero income on mat leave, and low child benefits. The following year - nearly 18 months later - you'll suddenly be drowning in money as you will presumably have gone back to work, but the means testing says "oh, shit, you earned *nothing* last year!".
I don't like how it's all so middle class focussed. If you're earning $12k, then you're in a whole other place from someone earning $35k.
But, still. Better than Harper. Perhaps. Environmentally, certainly.