Leaked comments from Forbes
Initial Brexit vote impact was less than many expected
Thought cost of fresh QE outweighed the benefits
Won't be voting against agreed QE rise each month
There are some signs of firms delaying major UK investments
Softer investment has been offset by stronger consumer spending
Looks like the WSJ have broken the embargo as this was held for release at 12.00 GMT, though the speech is up on the BOE website now.
To the comments themselves, here's all the headers in full from the speech. Overall it's not hawkish, just less dovish than other members of the MPC.
"Moreover, the initial effect on the UK economy of the referendum has been less stormy than many expected. Uncertainty in the run-up to the vote created less drag, meaning that the UK went into the summer with more underlying momentum in domestic demand in Q2 than previously believed. The survey data has been extremely volatile - volatility that makes capital flow volatility look mild - and may continue to ebb and flow based more on political than economic news. The commercial property market and housing market are weaker (although some of this softening preceded the vote). There is some evidence that companies are delaying major investments - which could lead to weaker employment, wages, output, and productivity growth in the future. But these forces have been partially balanced by strong consumer spending. Net exports are also poised to pick up and provide some support to the economy.
The aggregate impact of all of these forces appears to be a modest slowing in the economy to date, one which I believed merited a modest easing in monetary policy this August. I felt that a decrease in Bank Rate, combined with a new Term Funding Scheme to deliver lower borrowing costs, would provide sufficient stimulus based on the data available at that time. I felt that the costs of additional easing through asset purchases were greater than the benefits, and therefore did not support additional programs of government and asset purchases. Now that these new asset purchase programs have been announced, however, I will not be voting against them each month. This is not because I have changed my assessment of these programs, but rather that I believe the Monetary Policy Committee should not reverse a programme where purchases are already underway and agreed on by the majority, barring a substantial change in economic circumstances.
Looking forward, I am not yet convinced that additional monetary easing will be necessary to support the economy. The behaviour of UK consumers and businesses, and evolution of prices, will be critically important in determining the appropriate action. Will consumers continue to be as resilient to the clouds of uncertainty about their relationship with the EU as they are to the frequent clouds and light rain outside? Will businesses continue to hire and avoid reducing their workforces? Will wages and domestic costs continue their gradual increase towards levels consistent with the 2% inflation target? How much and for how long will inflation be pushed up by the increase in import prices arising from sterling's depreciation? And even if the UK manages modest growth and a restrained increase in domestic prices over the next few quarters, will there be any negative events originating abroad that present risks?
Which way these winds blow will determine the appropriate stance of monetary policy in the future. For now, however, the economy is experiencing some chop, but no tsunami. The adverse winds could quickly pick up- and merit a stronger policy response. But recently they have shifted to a more favourable direction."
