Matt Noffs: The Australian Capital Territory’s chief minister, Andrew Barr, has said that he would contemplate reforming drug laws beyond cannabis, including MDMA. Go on, admit it, you dream about regulating ecstasy, don’t you?

Alex Wodak: Yes, I’ve been dreaming about this and thinking about it for a long time. I think it’s worth discussing.

Noffs: Being involved so heavily in pill testing myself, I wonder if this new development, despite its merits, hurts the pill testing debate?

Wodak: I don’t think it does and I certainly wouldn’t want to harm the pill testing debate. We should be able to discuss rationally what might be better options for now and what might be even better options a little down the track. As Barr has said: it’s “evolutionary, not revolutionary”.

Noffs: Australia would be the first to take control of MDMA in that way, wouldn’t it? We know that there are obviously trials of MDMA use in a therapeutic setting the US, but in a recreational setting? Do you know any other country that’s taken control of MDMA by regulating the sale of it?

Wodak: No country, no jurisdiction has regulated pharmaceutical-grade MDMA. We aspire as a nation to be first in sport or science. What’s wrong with also aspiring to be first in the world in public health? I think regulating MDMA is a low-risk policy option.

Noffs: But say we legalised MDMA tomorrow. Say we regulated it. Sold it over the counter. Most people will assume there will be more deaths because of increased use. Don’t you think so?

Wodak: Of course I wouldn’t advocate it if I thought that more people would be harmed through either death or disease by a policy that I was advocating. The harm done in a community is due to the toxicity of the drug and the number of people who use that drug. Clearly, pharmaceutical-grade drugs are less harmful than the same drugs distributed through the black market.

Noffs: When people think about legalising, they often think you’d legalise it in the way that a chocolate bar or a bar of soap would be sold over the counter. That’s not how it was done in Kings Cross with heroin, was it? And that’s why we haven’t got every teenager lining up in Kings Cross to shoot up. So how would you pitch this to the ACT, who we might assume would be the first jurisdiction to contemplate this. How could they contemplate taking control of this in a way that makes parents feel safe in the idea that it’s not going to be sold as confectionery?

Wodak: I would want to see pharmaceutical-grade MDMA in a safe dose starting off being distributed through pharmacies. I would want to see the pharmacies requiring proof of age of the person who wants to purchase the MDMA. There’s no age restriction for black-market ecstasy.

Noffs: What about the idea of using doctors to write prescriptions as another regulatory buffer?

Wodak: Most doctors would be unhappy about doing that, but that doesn’t matter. If we had, at the start, 5% of doctors who were happy to be involved in this way, that would be enough to develop a system.

Noffs: It’s surprising for me to see so much change within a few years. How similar is this to the political situation of the 1980s and 90s with the needle syringe programs and then the injecting room?

Wodak: I think it’s not quite as difficult as the situation was in the 80s when we had the HIV epidemic breathing down our neck. It was threatening to become a generalised epidemic, reaching low-risk populations. That was very, very scary.

Noffs: So what’s the difference? Why has drug reform’s time come?

Wodak: Because drug prohibition has failed. We’ve now got scores of former prime ministers, former presidents, and even serving prime ministers and presidents recognising the need for drug law reform. And it’s starting to happen.

Noffs: Earlier in the year I thought you might be pushing the “regulating MDMA” idea a bit too far, but it looks like I was simply lacking the courage and foresight. Do you want to give me an obligatory “I told you so”?

Wodak: No ... this isn’t an easy subject. People need time to think about it. Despite the breakthroughs, the politics of this is still fiercely difficult. But, on the other hand, let’s remember what’s important about this: it’s human life, the sacredness of human life and also the difficulty that young people have in the world today. Drug reform makes a material difference to young people – it’s about their future health and safety. I’m happy we haven’t given up yet.

Noffs: Me too.

• Matt Noffs is the chief executive of the Ted Noffs Foundation and a spokesman for the Take Control Campaign for Safer, Saner Drug Laws; Alex Wodak is the president of the Drug Law Reform Foundation