If someone with an inquisitive streak wants access to public records from, say, a local government or state agency that doesn't want to give them up, the fight can be long and expensive. Sometimes, the legal bills run to the tens of thousands of dollars, even if the public's right to such records under North Carolina law ought to be obvious.

Yet as things stand now, those people who successfully sue the government over access to records are at the mercy of judges, who may or may not award adequate fees to be paid by the losing party. Legislation introduced by Sen. David Hoyle, Democrat from Gaston County, and passed unanimously by the Senate, would make payments of "reasonable" legal fees automatic in such cases.

Against that common-sense change stands House Speaker Joe Hackney, who apparently has decided to make the bill go away in his chamber, telling a House committee chair not to consider it. This isn't like Hackney, normally a backer of open government who as speaker has sought to have the House engage in fair debate from all sides. His stated reason for deep-sixing the measure is that he didn't want to have it acted upon in the last days of this legislative session. That sounds more like an excuse than a reason, and Hackney simply has made a bad call.

Yes, such a bill would indeed benefit news organizations such as The News & Observer, which has led its share of battles over public records access. And yes, The N&O has editorialized many times over the years against rush-jobs on Jones Street with regard to legislation that moves on through in a hurry.

But in speaking to the first point, it should be noted that individuals, as well as newspapers, often seek records. And governments and agencies may deny access because it's easier to do things without public monitoring, despite what the law says, or perhaps just because those in power think they can get away with it.

It's also true that when news organizations challenge the government over access to records, they are acting in line with their role as watchdogs for the public. But where a newspaper might be able to foot the legal bills in such a case, win or lose, people acting on their own may not have the financial resources to pursue records requests if it means going to court.

As to the issue of last-minute action, in this case Hackney's reasoning falls apart. This issue has been stewing in the Legislative Building for weeks, and was passed by the Senate. It is not as if a legislative leader were trying to sneak something in without discussion and debate.

The public's business is the public's business. Sometimes, conducting it in public, particularly when there are sharp differences on an issue, is uncomfortable for those in power. They'd just as soon do things quietly.

But the virtue of public discourse and the public's right to know is something that goes back to the very foundation of this democracy. When that right is denied, it is a serious matter, as North Carolina law recognizes, and when someone wins a legal action, getting government to do the right thing should not carry with it prohibitive expense.

This is a good bill, and Hackney should not have used his power to quash it. While the legislature remains in session, it's not too late for him to change his mind.