A report from the National Audit Office (AGN, for its acronym in Spanish) says that during 2005 several students of the College of Economics of the University of Buenos Aires did internships in state agencies and private companies performing tasks that did not correspond to them.

The work, approved last year on data from 2005, points out that in an agreement signed between the house of high studies and the National Commission of Automotive Transport, the creation of a "group of services", called Center of Assistance of Sciences (CACETT), made up of interns who were to "contribute to the development of the sector through research and provision of control, evaluation and inspection services". However, after analyzing compliance with the agreement, it was detected that "in practice, the personnel affected by the activities of the CACETT carried out administrative and operational tasks specific to the National Commission for Transport Regulation (CNRT, for its acronym in Spanish), as inspectors in Bus terminals, tellers, dissemination of users' rights, call center, attention to the public, reception, briefing, etc., that are far from the research functions.

On the other hand, the control body adds that the CACETT obtains income from the sale of goods, services, tariffs and contributions from promoters, and emphasizes that although it is managed by Economics, this money is registered as "third party funds", it is Say, "are extra budgetary" in the College and "are outside the requirements of Law 24.156 (Financial Administration) and public control systems." Likewise, this collection "is not part of the budget of the CNRT," completes the AGN.

But beyond the CACCET, in the National Communications Commission (CNC, for its acronym in Spanish) something similar occurred in terms of technical assistance.

The CNC had requested specialists in communications, communications economics, computer systems and radio communication procedures for its Work, Research and Development Program, an agreement signed with Economics that has been in force since 1997. In this unit, the auditors found that "Technicians do not fulfill the necessary profile required, keeping in mind that the contracted personnel practice the professions of journalism, locution, carpentry and law."

The head of human resources of the CNC told the AGN that he was unaware of the agreements between the Commission and the College, a framework of 1991 and the one of technical assistance of 1997. He added that the contracting of Interns is made "according to the needs of the organism to be affected to different operational areas, without being linked to a research program." In addition, the auditors verified that "several technical assistants provide services in other public bodies, such as the Chamber of Deputies and the Ministries of Economy and Federal Planning, and the reason for such proceeding does not arise from the actions analyzed."

Among its general observations, the Audit pointed out that "there are technical assistance framework agreements that do not have the validation of the UBA High Council;" That, before signing the internships, the College does not have a background to prove the legal status of the company that hires the student; And that "no control procedures were carried out" in private firms or state agencies to verify whether interns were actually providing services, which also serves as a basis for calculating billing.

The work of academic tutors and tutor coordinators was also not controlled. And the data they handled in Economics were "out of date": during the period audited, the College did not have "reliable and complete information on the agreements or framework agreements signed with public bodies and private companies, the Work Programs, and Training, the Active interns (or) the designated tutors."

In the internship records, the AGN observed "billing inconsistencies for $804,597." Punctually, "invoices with the same numbering" were detected and it is not known what treatment was given to those duplicate documents that, in the margin, are made in the same printer of the College. The technicians were not able to prove that "formal arrangements were made for the collection of unpaid invoices from 1997 onwards."

At the time of the report, the Audit discovered that there was no administrative act that would enable them to do that task, which they played with receipts in which there was no pre-printed legend that identifies them as such. To complete, the technicians affirmed that the Treasury of the University did not control the receipts that delivered the agents "of way to assure an integral surrender of the collections."