TENSIONS were high as confusion over a proposal to combine the information centre with Shopmobility led to a councillor shouting at a member of the public in an official meeting.

A packed-out public gallery raised concerns over the wording of a proposal voted on by the city council's finance and governance committee last night, with no answers forthcoming as the meeting ended.

The committee met to determine whether a budget of up to £35,000 should be allocated for the refurbishment of the Maltings Shopmobility unit.

But Conservative councillors caused confusion by refusing to clarify whether the vote also had an impact on the controversial decision to combine the city's award-winning information centre, located at the back of the Guildhall in Fish Row, with the existing Shopmobility unit underneath Sainsbury's car park, a location opposition members described as "a dungeon".

Eight members of the public spoke to voice their concerns that the move would have a negative impact on tourism and trade, before being told by committee chairman Simon Jackson that the vote did not relate to the information centre, only for funding to refurbish Shopmobility.

It came to a head when one member of the public gallery, Sara Moss, stood up to ask councillors to clarify exactly what they were deciding ahead of their vote.

In response, councillor Kevin Daley shouted at her: "We all know what it's about - get off!", causing boos from the public gallery and Labour leader Michael Osment to demand an apology (which was not forthcoming), adding: "You never speak to the public like that."

And several members of the public walked out of the meeting in protest after it became clear Conservative councillors were not going to address an almost 6,000 signature-strong petition signed by those against the decision to merge the services.

Mary Webb, Wiltshire leader of the Federation of Small Businesses, said: "As councillors, you were elected by the residents of Salisbury and you should make any decision on our behalf, and not your political party.

"Listening to your local constituents and their obvious concerns on this proposal is democracy in action."

And local Ruby Vitorino confirmed "feelings are running high" over the issue, adding: "The public can be slow to move, cynical or divided when it comes to unpopular decisions made by the council.

"Not this time. We really don't want this move to happen and we don't want to be misrepresented by the councillors whom we elected."

Opposition councillors called for the vote to be delayed by a year, until plans for the Maltings redevelopment project had been clarified, or for the matter to be put to a full council vote.

Neither these suggestions, nor the petition, were addressed before the committee voted in favour of allocating £35,000 to the budget.

It also emerged that the city council had not received any money from central government in wake of the ongoing nerve agent investigations in the city, and this money could not be used to keep the information centre where it was.

Conservative council leader Matthew Dean blamed the Journal for public confusion over the issue, and said: "I don't think that the administration's proposals have been clearly communicated to the public", despite later apologising and admitting he had made a "U-turn" on the council's original proposal, as reported by this paper.

He said: "We want to make it absolutely clear that the tourist element of the information centre will continue to be located in this Guildhall."

Councillors could not provide any answers as to what the existing information centre will be used for.

Previously, the services committee suggested it would be used for city council office space, but last night it was mentioned that it may be rented out for use as a cafe.

Cllr Osment commented: "They want to move the staff out, but they don't even know what they want to use the space for."

He urged Cllr Dean to reconsider the decision, adding: "If you want the credibility and you want the support of the public, stick your hands up when you have got it wrong.

"You can't ignore those 5,000 people and more."

The Journal has asked for confirmation on whether last night's vote encompasses plans for the relocation of the information centre.