在2026年7月30日的英国央行货币政策委员会（MPC）投票中，支持维持基准利率不变的票数是否为0？

该轮次没有提交预测理由。

该轮次没有提交预测理由。

该轮次没有提交预测理由。

该轮次没有提交预测理由。

该轮次没有提交预测理由。

The expected vote breakdown from the BOE's MPC meeting is a 7-2 split, with 7 members voting to maintain the rate at 3.75% and 2 members (Huw Pill and Megan Greene) voting to hike it. Therefore, the number of votes to keep the rate unchanged will be 7, not zero.

June MPC vote was 7 maintain, 2 for hike, 0 for cut. July vote is expected to be similar or shift modestly toward cuts but nowhere near eliminating all votes for maintaining the rate. Zero votes to keep unchanged would require unanimous preference for either hike or cut, which is inconsistent with divided committee views on energy risks vs growth. Strongest evidence is June official vote breakdown and July previews indicating continued division but not unanimity against hold. Main uncertainty is exact split after new data. Only an extreme data surprise would produce zero hold votes.

For zero members to vote to keep Bank Rate unchanged, all nine MPC members would have to vote for a change (hike or cut) on July 30. That is implausible: in June seven of nine members voted to hold at 3.75%, the leadership (Bailey, Breeden) has consistently favored holding while assessing conflict-driven inflation pass-through, and consensus expects another hold. Even in the scenario where the Bank hikes, several members would still vote for no change, so the unchanged count will not be zero.

该轮次没有提交预测理由。

A zero-hold vote would require all nine MPC members to support changing the rate. Instead, the prior meeting had seven hold votes, and all 70 economists polled by Reuters expect the rate to remain unchanged in July. At least a clear majority of hold votes is overwhelmingly likely.

The question is whether the number of votes to keep the Bank Rate unchanged was zero. Historical MPC vote‑splits since late 2024 consistently show a sizable bloc always voting for unchanged, even in meetings with cut or hike minorities. The current structure (seven‑member committee plus governor and external members) plus the Governor’s recent statements emphasizing a cautious approach make a unanimous rejection of the status‑quo highly improbable. Finance data (BoE‑linked instruments) do not fully resolve this institutional‑voting pattern, but the prior behavior of the committee strongly indicates that at least one member will always vote for unchanged, so a zero‑unchanged‑vote outcome is extremely unlikely; evidence from recent minutes and voting patterns supports a very high probability of NO.

该轮次没有提交预测理由。

This asks whether the number of votes to keep the Bank Rate unchanged at the July 30, 2026 MPC meeting was zero, meaning all members voted for a change (either cut or hike). A unanimous vote for change is rare for the BoE, which typically has at least some dissent. Even if the BoE cuts, some members usually prefer to hold. Estimated P(unanimous cut) ≈ 0.10, P(unanimous hike) ≈ 0.00. Assigned 0.10 YES. Main uncertainty: a dramatic data shock could unify the committee, but this is uncommon.