For the record, I think it was astute of her to try to bring the independence/devolution matter forward in an attempt to try to control the debate.
However, set against the repeated and continuing refusal to discuss independence, or even to see it is a viable possible alternative, she was bound to get a lot of flak. Indeed, having apparently not discussed the matter with her colleagues or with Number 10, she appeared to be doing the political equivalent of strapping the 12-bore to her temple whilst writing a suicide note.
She duly took collateral damage from her own colleagues, before wondering dazed into the line of fire from the Government.
Now the BBC report that her proposal for an early referendum may not be constitutionally possible without the support of a member of another political party and even then may not be allowed if the Government intend to legislate on the matter during the current term.
The former rule is eminently sensible to try to avoid political grandstanding, and you would have thought that one of the political allies (definition: someone we use to get into power; and ignore as irrelevant at other times) would have been lined up to jump that hurdle.
Not so, our Wendy. Walking blindly into an elephant trap that her own party designed, approved and legislated on, it appears that they never read the rules, and have little idea of how it all works.
The second obstacle is less clear, but would seem to prevent any opposition party launching A Good Idea as a piece of legislation by allowing the Government to promise to intend to think about - maybe - bringing forward the self-same legislation themselves.
Irrespective, yet another good plan scuppered by the most basic failings to understand the rules around the game.
Are there any depths of incompetence to which Labour cannot plummet?