CELEBRITIES. They are a part of every aspect of our lives these days, gracing the covers of gossip magazines, staring in reality TV shows and even getting involved in politics.

But unlike their MP counterparts, the likes of Bono, Bob Geldof, Joanna Lumley and Jamie Oliver really manage to make people sit up and take notice.

Billions of people supported Live 8 in 2005 when famous faces from across the globe joined forces in a bid to make poverty history, and Jamie Oliver collected 300,000 signatures on a petition in 2006 when he tried to persuade the government to improve school dinners.

Actress Joanna Lumley is the latest celebrity to join a political row as she campaigns for Gurkha soldier settlement rights.

The Absolutely Fabulous star even addressed the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee as she expressed her shock that last week’s defeat of the government had not yet led to a change of policy.

But just why do we take more notice of faces usually more associated with entertainment than of our real-life politicians?

We took to the streets of Bournemouth to find out.

Matt Hebditch, 39, a bank worker from Moordown, believed it was often simply a matter of politicians losing sight of common sense.

“I think people to tend to take more notice of celebrities because they’re more in the limelight,” he said.

“Whether politicians can be trusted is another matter. But I think sometimes it’s to do with common sense – the biggest example is the Gurkhas. Sometimes people think if a celebrity speaks common sense I think people take more notice of them.”

Eva Worobiec, a supply teacher in her late 50s from Wareham, agreed that people took more notice of celebrities, but added that it depended on the celebrity, and their reason for getting involved.

“Joanna Lumley is someone that I really admire,” she said.

“She’s intelligent and I know that she’s been involved with the Gurkhas for a long time.”

Her husband, Tony, an author, added: “People like Bono and Bob Geldof, you know they’re doing it sincerely, they’re doing it because they know that they have a high profile. They’re not just doing it as a front, either, they go out there and see what the problems are.”

Sarah Bennett, 38, a company director from Southbourne, agreed that the celebrity and their links to the issue were a big factor.

“I think just having that high profile person, it just seems to lift the campaigns,” she said.

“But it depends on what the issue is and what their link is to it. Joanna Lumley had personal ties to the Gurkhas so you know she’s not just doing it for the publicity.”

However Chris Chope, Conservative MP for Christchurch, said normal people were often the catalyst for change, rather than famous faces.

“I’m not sure that the business over the Gurkhas would be any different without Joanna Lumley,” he said.

“I think really the government got themselves on the wrong end of the argument and people are in a very sentimental mood about the servicemen and the people that risk their lives.

“They thought it was an issue of fair play. It wasn’t Joanna Lumley that defeated the government, it was the members of Parliament.”

Mr Chope added that the government often used celebrities to gain public support, rather than the actors and pop stars themselves coming up with campaigns themselves.

“Quite often the government itself tries to be cool because it doubts its own persuasive powers,” he explained. “So they start using people on their behalf. That’s what happened with Jamie Oliver and with Bob Geldof. They try to use people in the public eye.”

But Sir John Butterfill, Conservative MP for Bournemouth West, said using celebrities to gain public support was nothing new.

“It’s always happened,” he said. “I’ve done it. When I campaigned recently for blindness allowance Peter White was very much involved with us. He’s very well known in the BBC and he’s blind.

“I suppose if it’s people that people know and that they like they think ‘if they think it’s a good thing then it must be’.”