You can't bag the Monetary Policy Committee.

Well, you can, but in this case, you would be fairly churlish.

Personally, I would have held, but given the vote was done by consensus I clearly would have been a lone voice.

Three hikes are coming, we may get them every other meeting, and we will end up with a cash rate of 3.25%.

If you want the glass half full, look at Australia. Their cash rate is well into the 4% and inflation is far from over. And that’s before I get to the upcoming jobs issues, not to mention the property correction.

But back to us. Inflation is why they are hiking and will continue to hike.

But, and it's a big 'but', surely there is an argument that says it's not as bad as we feared? And not just that, it's peaked and is trending down – down to exactly where it needs it to be.

Besides, a lot of the inflation remaining is council rates and cost-plus-accounting from power prices.

The Taxpayers Union blames the Government, which is an Australian argument, but not applicable here.

The Government has an operating budget of $2.1 billion, which is anaemic. We are $3 billion better off on latest figures than we thought.

The Government is not blowing out the inflation.

But the main reason I would have held is the psychology of pulling the trigger too soon. We are fragile. New Zealand loves a funk and we have been in a funk, and we don’t need misery merchants.

The bank is clinical, which in part is their job. But a good part of any economy is the psychology of it, the vibe of it, the mood of it.

We need help on the mood. We need a lesson to get on with it, and we need to be encouraged. A rate hike doesn’t do that.

Look, this isn't a disaster. It's not even a bad mistake. It's probably just an unwelcome attitude driven by number wonks, not empaths, who could have been a bit more generous.

New Zealand is on the move again. The bank says 25 points doesn’t hinder that.

I'm not convinced they're right.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.