The setting could not be more inauspicious: CNI’s office in Valletta is a basic, tiny office in Strait Street, corner with Archbishop’s Street, a crossroad between the Gut, scene of so many “military” exploits in Malta’s colourful (and colonial) past, and the street which so many pro-Gonzi (the archbishop, not the Prime Minister) demonstrations used to go down.

It is from this office with bare shelves that CNI and its leader intend to fight for Malta’s independence. At 73, Dr Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, ever the gentleman, is still sprightly even though he has had two very serious operations in the past months. “My regret,” he told me in an interview, “is that I have not yet found a younger person to take over from me and carry on the fight.”

His contention is simple: many who voted for EU membership in 2003 have now regretted their decision. Although the Labour Party has now accepted EU membership, there may be an even greater majority today against EU membership than the pro-membership majority was in 2003. And by the same democratic principle that the will of the majority must prevail, so too should it be ascertained that if there is a majority that says Malta must exit the EU, it too must prevail.

One of the most mentioned arguments against exiting the EU is that Malta would thus lose out on the EU’s structural funds. But a close examination might show this is not the case: Malta stands to get 855 million euros in the next seven years, some Lm52 million a year. But according to the Budget Speech, Malta will give back to the EU no less than Lm22 million a year. And, as from 1 January 2008, Malta’s Central Bank reserves will be taken over by the European Central Bank, therefore, Malta will forfeit the Lm11 million profit the Central Bank of Malta makes each year on its reserves. That’s already Lm33 million.

Furthermore, Malta lost the Italian Protocol Funds on joining the EU. This used to amount to Lm14 million. That’s Lm47 million so far. And it is very easy to state that paying for the civil servants in every ministry whose job is to deal with the EU, let alone the 55 employees in Malta’s representation in Brussels, amount to more than Lm5 million a year.

So, Dr Mifsud Bonnici concludes, a twinkle in his eyes, the biggest argument against exiting the EU is without any basis.

Furthermore, the EU’s policies that forbid State aid are totally unsuitable for Malta. Due to these policies, the government of Malta is not allowed to provide incentives for enterprises to increase jobs. However, it can be argued that the government would not spend more than it is spending today if it were to help enterprises to retain jobs and even increase them as this expenditure would be counterbalanced by less spending on unemployment benefits and increased revenue from VAT and Income Tax.

Some argue that if Malta adopts the euro, it will not be able to leave the EU. This is not true, Dr Mifsud Bonnici argues: on the contrary, euro membership makes it easier for us to leave the EU. Today, those who have the dollar can buy anything in the world. So too would we, if instead of the Maltese lira, we have the euro.

Many have recently complained about the steep rise in property prices. This, he argues, is undoubtedly a direct consequence of EU membership since we were compelled to charge 18 per cent VAT on services – architects, contractors, and so on – which consequently hiked up property prices by 18 per cent. The EU will not allow Malta to cut the tax on services, whereas this is possible outside the EU. Besides, property prices have also risen due to the increased demand by EU citizens to come and reside here.

As an EU member State, Malta can no longer enter into agreements with other countries on its own and in its own interest. It can no longer purchase oil at an advantageous price from Libya as it used to do. Nor can it sign commercial agreements at favourable rates: it must observe the EU’s common external tariff.

Nor can Malta, inside the EU, really and truly defend its own security. Malta cannot go counter to the EU’s external policy. This is making Malta look like being against the Islamic world: in Muslim eyes there is no distinguishing between Malta, Italy, France, Spain or the UK.

The EU’s policies on immigration are directly jeopardising Malta’s real interest because in truth illegal immigrants who come here do not want to come to Malta but reach the EU. The EU is now forcing us to accept and house them here whereas we should help them on their way to where they really want to go.

One other argument that used to be made in favour of membership was that EU membership would help strengthen our values. This, Dr Mifsud Bonnici argued, without wasting any words on what to him is palpably evident, is manifestly not true.

Which brought him directly to the political side of his argument. If the big political parties do not give voice to those who are eurosceptic, people will still find a way to express themselves. In the House or Lords there are two members who have now joined the UKIP; this movement has both Conservative and Labour members of the House of Commons. In Poland, the second largest party in the governing coalition is eurosceptic and in the Czech Republic, the President of the Republic, no less, is eurosceptic.

Whenever people have been directly questioned about the EU, whether on the Constitution as in France or Holland, or on the euro as in Denmark and Sweden, the big parties were europhiles but the people voted against.

Here in Malta, the PN supporters who have turned against EU membership are now following ANR and on the Labour side people who are against EU membership have nowhere to go except to CNI, which is not a Labour organisation but the majority of whose members are Labourites.

CNI will continue to argue its reasons until there is enough pressure to hold a new referendum on whether to stay in the EU or leave.