Certainly, newborn screening is one of the major public health successes of the last 50 years. I would say that every province in Canada, indeed almost every jurisdiction that I'm aware of, at least in the developed world, does have some sort of newborn screening in place.
The panels differ from province to province, and those are under the purview of the provinces to decide, although there certainly are some common conditions, including phenylketonuria or congenital hypothyroidism, which are essentially screened for universally. The purpose of these programs is primarily to screen for conditions that are eminently treatable in the neonatal period, for which the children have a pre-symptomatic window where they're completely well, but if exposed to either a certain toxin in their diet—it can be things that are well tolerated by normal children—or in the absence of a hormone such as thyroxine, their development will regress in an irreversible way.
That's the principle of newborn screening, which is universal across Canada, to identify a small subset of diseases for which there's a rapid, usually a relatively cheap, therapeutic intervention. Where there becomes a little bit more tension is on whether you expand that screening to detect also conditions that are untreatable. There are arguments pro and against that.