I feel that Neil called it a CH album because, having decided to reform the band, doing anything else would have made life very messy: what were his choices?
1) Ask the band to tour his SOLO album. Not likely.
2) Release the album with no tour and head straight back to the writing desk. A real shame for the material on TOE, really hard work for the songwriter and frustrating because it would delay actually working/touring with the band.
I remain unimpressed by any argument that he decided to consider a collection of songs as band songs because they sounded like the band. That's just disrespectful toward the band and it's history. Perhaps I'm just really sensitive to this because I lived through and adored CH Mk1. I'd be interested to know whether there's any correlation between the two opposing views and when each of us "came on board".
All I have left to say is that I respect those who are happy to call TOE a CH album. I just have a really hard time with it.