The push to legalise ecstasy isn't finding many supporters in Parliament.

A Wellington doctor suggested it, commenting that MDMA is safer than alcohol.

The psychoactive drug, usually referred to as Ecstasy, induces powerful euphoric effects. It became popular in the 1980s as an energy-boosting party drug.

Labour's associate health spokesperson David Clark isn't biting, saying he "doesn't have an opinion on that."

New Zealand First MP Ron Mark isn't keen.

He said there's been absolutely no discussion about it within the party.

"New Zealand First? You've got to be joking."

And Green Party co-leader James Shaw said they have more important things to worry about, and don't have a policy on it.

"It's not a priority for us, you know, we're sort of more focussed on climate change and inequality."

However, while no MPs are looking to push an MDMA policy, two experts say the issue is worth debating.

Paul Quigley, an A & E specialist at Wellington Hospital's emergency department, believes making the pure form of ecstasy available would reduce the impact of unregulated, unsafe alternatives.

"It's not associated with the risk of cancer, it's not got the same social disruption that alcohol's been associated with. It doesn't have any immediate health effects in terms of your liver, and so on."

"Let's run it through the tests," he said. "If it passes, should we consider putting something safer on the street to get rid of these other harmful agents?"

Executive Director of the New Zealand Drug Foundation Ross Bell believes the issue Quigley is raising is a fraught argument, but legalisation would mean regulation.

"At the moment, MDMA is scheduled in our Misuse of Drugs Act so what he's saying legally can't happen right now...That might mean at some point looking at regulating substances that are lower risk."

"I think it is a debate worth having."