Not much of a shock, but - what’s the logic in this argument? “There’s no asbestos now, so there’s no need to regulate?” How does that make sense? Without regulation, how can you verify that there’s no asbestos now, and how can you ensure there will continue to be no asbestos in the future?
Like who would buy an ‘argument’ like that?
(Also be sure to check your doubt-diodes periodically; it's quite possible for both sides to be wrong, lying, shading the truth, or just full of it.)