Three of the five Bank of England policy-makers who voted to keep interest rates on hold earlier this month said they hadn't seen enough data to convince them that a rate hike was necessary. Speaking before the influential Treasury Select Committee, they said there was not enough evidence at their meeting earlier this month to convince them of the need for a second straight quarter point rise in the repo rate to 5.75 pct. Four members, including the BoE's governor Mervyn King, voted for a hike. The Treasury Select Committee's chairman John McFall questioned why the Monetary Policy Committee kept rates on hold when its Inflation Report in May indicated that CPI inflation would only return to the 2.0 pct target were rates to rise to an average of 5.7 pct over the next three months. "The question at the last meeting for me was not so much why wait (to raise rates) but what's the rush," said Rachel Lomax. "The data that we'd had on the month didn't suggest that things had moved in a particularly worrying way -- indeed there was beginning to be some signs of softening in consumer spending and in the housing market which I wanted to keep an eye on," she said. Lomax added that there was big uncertainty about the outlook for the economy in the months ahead in light of the previous rate rises. In that respect, Lomax said she will be looking to see if short-term inflation measures fall back as anticipated in the May Inflation Report. Meanwhile Paul Tucker said that while he shares recent concerns expressed by BoE deputy governor John Gieve about the rapid growth of money supply, he does not think that that, in and of itself threatens inflation expectations in the long-term. "Furthermore I thought that an increase in rates in June could have mistakenly conveyed to the public that we thought conditions were more difficult than I personally believe," he said. "But I do think that with an upward sloping yield curve implying some form of monetary tightening we are in an appropriate position to bear down on inflation in the medium term," he added. Meanwhile, external member David Blanchflower, often seen as the committee's most dovish member, said he voted for a rate rise in May due to March's spike in the annual rate CPI to 3.1 pct and the need for the committee to appear tough on tackling inflation. "However in June not very much had actually emerged, there was no obvious reason to move then and I continue to have concerns about the labour market and I'm trying to square that with things happening on the demand side" he said. "The suggestion that wage increases were going to take off had not occurred...we have to try and reconcile what's happening with the labour market with these other stories we've talked about," he added. Blanchflower added that there is a real potential in the coming months for consumption to fall by more than anticipated, especially as those who took out fixed rate mortgages two to three years ago at lower rates have to remortgage at the new higher level. In addition, he said that consumption impact may be exacerbated by the fact that wage growth has been so benign despite the energy-related inflation spike. Meanwhile, Tim Besley, considered to be one of the most hawkish members on the Committee, said consumption may not fall as much as anticipated, and said households may take out equity on their house when remortgaging to help sustain their levels of spending. Besley said he voted for a hike in June partly because action now may well mean that the peak in this interest rate cycle will be lower. With the economy fairly strong, he said a rate hike in June could have put the Committee in a better position in a year's time. He also said an "element of caution" is needed when considering a half point hike in borrowing costs.