Developer's Consultation or Insult-ation at Tadpole Farm?

It has been said by those holding a loftier position than a Residents' Association secretary that the developer's consultation, concerning the Tadpole Farm application, was an insult (see Councillors' quotes from Planning Committee, Cllr Dempsey).

Here is a quote from the developer's Statement of Community Engagement, Nov. 2011 (Tadpole Farm), a requirement of the Localism Act:

"In spite of encouraging local people to comment on the detail of community facilities and timing of facilities to provide at Tadpole Farm, there was a reluctance to engage at this level of detail by those living locally.  They were either insufficiently concerned to submit a view..whilst others had more fundamental concerns and could therefore not contemplate the development proceeding until their concerns had been addressed to their satisfaction."

In my opinion, consultation is a word used copiously by many people, especially those in positions of influence, to encourage all those taking part to hope for something special.  The word consultation is "a noun meaning the action or process of formally consulting or discussing" (New Oxford Dictionary of English).  Might this engender a false assumption that there is more than one party actively involved in the discussion?  Discussion is defined in the same dictionary as, "the action or process of talking about something, typically in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas".

I was lucky enough to attend a training course recently about community engagement.  The course tutor took pains to explain that information sharing is often mistaken, by those organising an event, for consultation and that expectation is unnecessarily raised when the former is exchanged for the latter.  It was made very clear that anyone who works in a community setting must be careful to define their type of engagement accurately so that the outcome is mutually satisfactory for everyone.

So, did the developers fall into the age-old trap of asking for consultation when they only wanted to deliver their own script?  Is there a problem when consultation is left to those who only want one outcome?

I will quote directly from the planning offiers' report from the 12th June:

"The Localism Act received Royal Assent in November 2011.  One of its key aims is to empower local communities to determine what will be the most appropriate development for their neighbourhoods.  Although in its infancy a number of objections that have been received against this planning application suggest that the level of opposition to this proposal, totalling a collective 772 individuals together with 1 Town Council and 3 Parish Councils and a number of residential and amenity groups, may be in conflict with the requirements of the Act in that the views of the local community should be fully respected.

The applicants have engaged with the local community over a number of years and have submitted a Statement of Community Engagement with their application.
There is no material reason to suggest that the public consultation has not been as extensive or robustly held as it could be, and where possible, each stage of consultation, whether undertaken by the Council as part of the Core Strategy process or by the Developer as part of their pre-application process, the views of the public have been taken into consideration."

So, what exactly did ORA members receive from the developers and the Council?  Consultation, discussion, information or simply a tick-box exercise to satisfy the planning requirements?  Does the Localism Act empower the local community or give carte blanche to those who already hold most of the power?