In a summer rife with Twitter spats, Conservative MP Maxime Bernier’s remarks about “extreme multiculturalism” might be the most controversial of all.

The failed Conservative leadership candidate took to Twitter last weekend to argue the Liberal’s message of inclusionary immigration policies promoted “cultural balkanization” and would weaken the fabric of Canadian society.

“Having people live among us who reject basic Western values such as freedom, equality, tolerance and openness doesn’t make us strong,” read one of Bernier’s missives. “People who refuse to integrate into our society and want to live apart in their ghetto doesn’t make our society strong.”

The tweetstorm came in response to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s repeated slogan that diversity is Canada’s strength. During a speech in P.E.I. on Monday, Trudeau reiterated that “differences are always a source strength in Canada.”

[READ MORE: Maxime Bernier criticizes Justin Trudeau for promoting ‘ever more’ diversity]

Bernier’s comments have dominated the news cycle this week, as the public and members of his own party took turns condemning his remarks. Even Tony Clement, who supported Bernier’s run for the Conservative Party leadership, said his fellow MP’s remarks went too far.

Recognizing what would appear from the outside as a gaping internal division between his members, Conservative Party leader Andrew Scheer held a last-minute press conference in Regina to tell reporters “[Bernier] is speaking for himself.”

“I’m not going to get into internal caucus dynamics. Those are things we decided as a team, as a caucus, as Parliamentarians,” Scheer continued. “As I said, there is that expectation that we work towards the same goal.”

[READ MORE: Bernier doesn’t speak for Conservatives on any issue: Scheer]

Bernier later defended his tweets by saying he is not against diversity but is discouraging Canadians from “pushing for ever more of it.”

Andrew Griffith, a fellow at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute and an expert on diversity politics, agreed with Scheer that the issues with Canada’s multiculturalism are solely on Bernier’s shoulders.

“Bernier doesn’t understand multiculturalism,” Griffith told iPolitics. “It’s a policy and program that aims to integrate newcomers. We don’t expect them to fully integrate and lose all of their heritage and culture.”

Multiculturalism, as it stands today, is entrenched in several key Canadian laws.

References to multiculturalism in Canada started in 1971, when prime minister Pierre Trudeau recognized Canada’s linguistic and ethnic diversity, including a plan that created the bones of Canada’s modern-day immigration and refugee intake system.

Trudeau Sr. stated at the time that “no singular culture could define Canada” and accepted other cultural communities and their contributions to the country.

This was a major change for Canada, which until the end of the Second World War had been relatively closed to immigrants from outside the United Kingdom.

However, Pierre Trudeau’s commitment to a diverse nation did not result in a large number of immigrants coming to Canada. Between the 1960s to the 1980s, roughly 146,000 people resettled in Canada every year – about half of this year’s target immigration levels of around 300,000.

Over the next decade, there was a movement to enshrine multiculturalism in Canadian society. The word was included in Section 27 of Canada’s newly-writ Constitution of 1982 which tasks Canadian lawmakers with the “preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians.”

But multiculturalism did not yet have its own legislation. Canada’s multicultural legacy was signed into office under Conservative prime minister Brian Mulroney with the passing of the Multiculturalism Act in 1988.

Enshrined in the Act is specific language guaranteeing the “freedom of all members of Canadian society to preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage,” without having to assimilate to Canadian culture.

So when the Conservatives say they support multiculturalism and immigration, Griffith said history speaks for itself.

“The official Conservative position is not anti-immigration,” he said. “What they will do is focus on a few issues where they have concerns, like irregular border crossings.”

In fact, the Conservative’s constitution says it will build a coalition of people “who reflect the regional, cultural and socio-economic diversity of Canada. It goes on to outline how the coalition will “embrace” the differences and traditions of all Canada while “honouring a concept of Canada as the greater sum of strong parts.”

What Bernier could be doing with his tweets, Griffith suggests, is speaking to people concerned with multiculturalism within the Conservative Party’s base.

[READ MORE: Please play nice, Scheer urges Bernier]

“Bernier reflects a proportion of Conservative voters where there are concerns about integration and about immigration,” he said. “Fortunately, the official Conservative Party and those in leadership are trying to appeal to a wider group – not the narrow group that has those concerns.”

Other Conservatives, like Michelle Rempel, are not against multiculturalism and immigration but are raising valid management issues with the Trudeau government’s current policies, Griffith continued.

Erin Tolley, an associate professor of political science at the University of Toronto, said Canadians traditionally hold one of three positions on immigration and multiculturalism. There are those who are passionately for immigration and those vehemently against, who will not change their beliefs no matter which party holds the seat majority in the House of Commons.

It’s the one-third of Canadians in the middle that Tolley called “conditional multiculturalists” that the two parties are currently fighting over. These people could be convinced either way to support or oppose Canadian immigration and multiculturalism policies.

For the last twenty years, Griffith and Tolley agree, the undecided one-third of Canadians have fallen into a positive camp who support multiculturalism. Part of the reason for their positivity, Tolley continued, is because politicians of all stripes have not gone out of their way to bring forward a negative discourse on immigration.

What is new this time around, Tolley continued, is that politicians making anti-immigration comments like Bernier’s are not on the fringes of their party, but are being given a platform through social media.

“This discourse does fly in the face of the general discourse in Canadian politics that you dont use that sort of rhetoric as a dividing point,” she told iPolitics. “If multiculturalism is framed as being extreme or radical or we’re heading to some sort of crisis situation, that absolutely influences people.”

Polling data seems to reflect that. A recent study from Angus Reid found 65 per cent of respondents believe there are too many irregular migrants coming to the country, with two-thirds calling irregular migration a “crisis” that would be best handled by Scheer.

However, Tolley warned, multiculturalism and the irregular migrants are two separate issues that should not be conflated.

But this does not mean anti-multiculturalism sentiment is completely gone. Griffith notes the Conservatives, under former prime minister Stephen Harper, opposed “symbolic” identity issues like niqabs at citizenship ceremonies and proposed the barbaric cultural practices hotline.

While he said there were “more substantive issues” with those policies, Griffith believes the language of the debate in Canadian politics does matter.

Whether or not Bernier decides to tweet about “extreme multiculturalism” again, it remains preserved under Canadian law. As for his status in the Conservative Party, Scheer said he would not remove Bernier but that the decision has to be made as a team. Until next week’s Conservative caucus meeting in Halifax, Bernier might want to stay away from Twitter.

Follow @anna_desmarais