MOKGORO J same position as citizens. Once admitted as permanent residents they can enter and leave the country.62 Their homes, and no doubt in most cases their families too, are in South Africa. Some will have children born in South Africa. They have the right to work in South Africa,63 and even owe a duty of allegiance to the state.64 For these reasons, I exclude temporary residents and it would have been appropriate for the High Court to have done so. [60] The respondents also sought to deny the benefit to permanent residents on the grounds that this would impose an impermissibly high financial burden on the state. The respondents relied for this point on an affidavit deposed to by Mr Kruger, the Chief Director of Social Services in the National Treasury. According to him, the development of a system of social grants has been a key pillar of the government’s strategy to fight poverty and promote human development. This has led to a substantial and rapid increase in expenditure on social grants. In the last three years alone the expenditure, excluding costs of administration, has increased from R16.1 billion to R26.2 billion. It is contemplated that over the next three years grants will increase from R26.2 billion to R44.6 billion. In addition, provision has to be made for expenditure on other socio-economic programmes. Mr Kruger says that if provision has to be made for the expenditure necessary to give effect to the High Court order, 62 Section 9(2) and 9(3)(d) of the Immigration Act. 63 Larbi-Odam and Others v Member of the Executive Council for Education (North-West Province) and Another 1998 (1) SA 745 (CC); 1997 (12) BCLR 1655 (CC) at para 24. 64 S v Tsotsobe and Others 1983 (1) SA 856 (A) at 866E; S v Zwane and Others 1989 (3) SA 253 (W) at 256I. 37