The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has used its submission to a Senate inquiry into its performance to argue for higher standards for financial advisers, tighter controls on "bad apples", broader whistleblower protection and stronger investigative and enforcement powers.In its submission to the Senate Economics Committee, released yesterday, ASIC said it had identified issues it regards as barriers to fulfilling its legislative responsibilities and obligations.It has recommended the introduction of a national examination to test the competence of financial advisers. It said the current system for training and assessing advisers was inadequate and standards needed to be lifted. The regulator believes there are insufficient controls on "bad apple" advisers. It would like to see the introduction of a requirement that advisers' references be checked in all cases.It also wants control over the people who manage financial advice and credit businesses.The submission said: "While we can ban a person from directly providing financial services or credit services, we cannot ban them from managing a financial services business or credit business."ASIC wants changes to its licensing powers to set the bar higher, so that "only businesses and individuals that deserve public trust" are allowed to work in the industry. It said the definition of whistleblower should be expanded to cover all the people who may require whistleblower protection. Such people would include former employees, financial services providers, accountants and auditors.And it wants see the scope of whistleblower protection widened to cover any misconduct that ASIC may investigate.ASIC said its investigation and enforcement powers - its "investigative toolkit" - should include a power to issue search warrants. The lack of search warrant powers leads to inefficiencies and delays, "and is not adequate to meet the complexity of modern corporate and financial investigations."It said the penalties available under corporations law had not been comprehensively reviewed for over a decade and, in many cases, did not meet community expectations.