The lack of preparation for Scottish independence in the rest of the UK is "astonishing", Britain's former most senior civil servant has said.
Former cabinet secretary Lord O'Donnell said heads were "stuck firmly in the sand" and called for more debate on the consequences of a Yes vote in next month's referendum.
Lord O'Donnell said the rest of the UK would be faced with "serious policy issues" in the event of independence, including the relocation of Trident, where to build military ships and how to distribute the UK's assets.
Writing in the Sunday Times, he said: "The departments of works and pensions and HMRC will have to find ways to unpick their computer systems to allow Scotland to have different policies.
"This will be a very expensive and lengthy task. It is astonishing that there has not been more debate about all these issues in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Heads are stuck firmly in the sand."
Lord O'Donnell said the lack of preparation by the UK Government could lead to negotiations in the event of independence taking longer than the 18 months set out by the Scottish Government.
He said: "We all face not just a constitutional mess but a protracted period of uncertainty as various issues are thrashed out.
"The UK Government is as worried about being seen to prepare for a Yes vote as the Scottish Government is about making plans for a No vote.
"Those of us now outside government have a duty to provoke debate on this profound decision that will have enormous implications for everyone in the United Kingdom."
Lord O'Donnell said the "main problem" with the Scottish Government's preference for a formal currency union with the rest of the UK was political.
The three main parties at Westminster have repeatedly ruled out that option and have called on First Minister Alex Salmond to set out a plan B.
Lord O'Donnell said: "It is inconceivable that, whatever the complexion of the UK Government after the May 2015 election, the new parliament would vote to constrain itself in the necessary manner for the sake of a currency union with Scotland."
He also described the Scottish Government's threat to walk away from its share of UK national debt as "empty", adding that "a default would result in Scotland paying higher interest rates for many years".
He said he would advise an independent Scotland to adopt its own currency and let it float.
"This would have the advantages of an independent central bank to act as a lender of last resort to the banking system, and exchange rate flexibility to cushion the impact of positive or negative shocks," he said.
A UK Government spokesman said: "We and the Scottish Government have both explained that it is not possible to pre-negotiate the terms of independence before the referendum.
"The UK Government has no mandate to act on behalf of only one part of the UK and against the majority of Scottish voters who intend to vote no."
A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: "It is for the UK Government to comment on their own contingency plans post referendum however we have repeatedly stated that Scotland can complete the negotiations required following a vote for independence within the 18-month period we have outlined - in line with widespread international precedent and a timescale described by the UK Government's own legal adviser, Professor James Crawford, as 'realistic'.
"There would be a mutual interest on the part of both Scotland and the rest of the UK in engaging constructively in negotiations after the referendum, as set out in the Edinburgh Agreement."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article