It's the "your reference to grooming is both baseless and offensive" bit in the response that I find interest. Anyone who's ever worked in a communications role, or just interacted with businesses and institutions, will note that this is very much not the way a business or a public institution would normally communicate with the public, especially in response to a complaint or concern raised. It's unprofessional. It doesn't sound like an official communication at all, it sounds like an offended individual who is not in a role in which they're answerable to the public. The person who wrote that is in that kind of role, though. But is not behaving as if they were. And that "how dare you I am outraged and personally offended" tone is consistent when it comes to responses to concerns or complaints that in any way relate to trans or "queer" issues or events from institutions trying to be woke.
Who are they hiring for those jobs, and why are the people hired not expected to adhere to typical corporate communications guidelines? Do their management know that they're addressing the public that way? What would happen if those responded to in that way went to the papers with those responses?
I'm at the point where I'm ready to go full Machiavelli and suggest that every time anyone receives a blatantly unprofessional, emotionally laden response like that from an institution they take it straight to the tabloids as well as the broadsheets (of which only The Times and The Telegraph would agree to cover it anyway).