Jim,
Teribus implied it by suggesting that facts were held back

The names of all those guilty of antisemitic statements, and the offending statements themselves, were held back Jim!
Also the entire report into the OULC!

Steve, Jim asked "does anyone else claim it."
The answer is yes.
Do some people not count?

Jim,
there was no serious problem found.

Yes there was. That was why the inquiries were convened, and why those inquiries made so many recommendations to deal with it.

"every definition of anti-Semitism but yours is wrong"
You refuse to give us yours
Chakrabarti refused to give hers too.
We do have the EU criteria.http://www.antisem.eu/projects/eumc-working-definition-of-antisemitism/

Steve,
Frankly, I get along just fine without a definition.

You failed to recognise Naz Shah's antisemitic statements that were recognised by the Labour NEC and Shah herself, so you do not get along "just fine."