That's incorrect. The title of a Queen Consort can only be changed by Act of Parliament. So that's some 1300 people who have something to do with it (although 700 never actually come to vote in the Lords)
Who said anything about changing it? Therefore, there's nothing incorrect there. The monarch is the fount of all honors, or are you disputing that too? The present Duchess of Cornwall can indeed automatically have the title of Queen Consort and still be using something else, therein does lie an historic anomaly but it's only an anomaly. Get it yet? All the talk about needing acts of parliament is overstated because no one has said she will not be Queen by law, just that she won't be actively and publicly using it. That decision was between her and her husband and the Queen. The government was informed and the government went along with it. Parliament was not required to do anything then and parliament won't need to have anything to do with it later, or their constitutional lawyers would obviously have pointed that out immediately when they came up with this formula for present and future usage.