As individuals, we make choices to better our lives as and when our individual means allow us to do so, for example if we are on low pay we may live on tins of beans, but as our income improves, we might extend that to a sunday roast with all the trimmings. When GDP increases then we makes choices to use that as an opportunity to improve rahter than just sustain health services - bring new treatments on line which may otherwise be too expensive. Those who oppose this are probably those who wold prefer the health service to diminish or be fit for their own purposes to facilitate reduced taxation.

That is also the argument that justifies the basis that determines whether a state is a net contributor to the EU budget - in order to work towards improvements in lives of all Europeans. To oppose this means taking an 'only what I want and **** the rest attitude'. Ah, someone who is les astute may say - why are we not prioritising those in need in our own country. Well,, says the astute person - because those who are without in this country are so not because we are helping others, or because we are a poor country, but being without is due purely to domestic economic and social policy.