Indeed, there are reasons to expect inflation to rise over coming months. Perhaps the biggest will also be seen next week. Annual wage inflation has already risen to its highest rate in almost four years, and Wednesday's figures could show a further rise. This would strengthen the view of those at the Bank who believe that unemployment is below the rate compatible with stable inflation.
Thanks in part to rising wages, consumer spending is also growing strong: official figures show that retail sales volumes rose by 4.5 per cent in the year to May. This could give retailers the market power to pass on any increases in costs in the form of higher prices.
This matters because wages aren't the only cost that's rising. The oil price has risen more than 20 per cent since its January low-point. Partly due to this, prices of manufactured goods have stopped falling. Having dropped by1.4 per cent in the 12 months to January, they have risen by 0.4 per cent since then.
The inflation hawks, therefore, have a point. But not, perhaps, an overwhelming one.
For one thing, imported inflation is likely to stay low. The eurozone still has high unemployment and a weak recovery. Leaving aside the mathematical effect of the fall in oil prices dropping out of the data, this will keep inflation low there. And low inflation in our main trading partner should mean low inflation here. This is especially the case given that sterling is strong; the trade-weighted index has risen 4 per cent since April.
What's more, labour productivity might at last be recovering after seven years of stagnation. In the three months to April, total hours worked rose only 0.1 per cent while GDP rose 0.5 per cent, implying a 0.4 per cent increase in productivity. If this pick-up continues - and it is an if - wage growth could be partly offset by efficiency gains.
There is, though, a more powerful argument against an early rate rise.
The most important fact about any economic forecast is that it is highly likely to be wrong. Policy-makers must therefore consider the balance of risks. And as the Bank's chief economist Andy Haldane said recently, these are asymmetric. If the Bank errs on the side of letting inflation rise, it can quite easily correct that error by raising rates sharply. But if it errs towards allowing the economy to slip towards recession, it cannot cut rates sharply, simply because they cannot fall (much) below zero. Mr Haldane said: "It is better to err on the side of over-stimulating, then course-correcting if need be, than risk derailing recovery by tightening and being unable then to course-correct." As Oxford University's Simon Wren-Lewis says: "if you are walking along a narrow cliff path, you shouldn't aim for the centre of the path."
This argues for rates staying low until we can be confident that inflation is rising. Which in turn implies that savers might face a long time of negative real returns on our money.
