Based upon section 6 of the Appendix to OECD document I sent, it would seem 
that there is a prima facie case for demanding the removal of Brett and the 
others who reply on behalf of the ABS from working on an ABS classification 
scheme, as they do not seem to understand English.
What section 6 says is:
> DSTI/EAS/STP/NESTI(2006)19/FINAL
> 11
> 6. Humanities
> 6.1 History and Archaeology
> . History (history of science and technology to be 6.3, history of 
> specific sciences to be under the
> respective headings); Archaeology;
> 6.2 Languages and Literature
> . General language studies; Specific languages; General literature 
> studies; Literary theory; Specific
> literatures; Linguistics;
> 6.3 Philosophy, Ethics and Religion
> . Philosophy, History and philosophy of science and technology;
> . Ethics (except ethics related to specific subfields); Theology; 
> Religious studies;

Anyone can see that what is meant here is that, for example, the history of 
physics,  would fall under 6.3, as it is under the classification rubric of 
6.3, that is "History and philosophy of science and technology". History of 
Economic Thought or Economic History could not logically or operationally be 
included in this category, as neither deal with "history of specific 
sciences" per-se, but are sub-fields recognized by the economics profession 
itself, i.e. by JEL classification, or do the Bureaucrats living in "Oz" 
want to also revise the JEL classification and overide the American Economic 
Association?

This is not splitting hairs. As one who has been a successful litigant 
against State power that wanted to put a highway through my back garden,
and got a supreme court judge to rule that the State also needs planning 
permission before it starts to build highways that have no basis in approved 
plans, I would suggest, on the basis of the above, that our good friend Dr. 
Brett and Brian Pink, who is the OECD expert, be taken before an Australian 
tribunal of judges that understand the Queen's English to explain how they 
justify classifying HET and ECH under section 6.3....

Warren Young