Under the previous rainbow government, "privatisation" was a dirty word. State companies could contemplate strategic alliances - sometimes effectively part-privatisations - but Margaret Thatcher`s legacy meant that the "p" word was never mentioned.
Public sector trade unions, a powerful force as partners in national programmes, ensured that the State retained control of all the major companies.
How it has all changed. Today, thousands of people will rush to put in their applications for Telecom shares in advance of the 4 p.m. deadline.
If it all goes well, then the public is likely to be offered other shares in formerly State-owned companies in future. The merged TSB and ACC is to be floated next year, Aer Rianta and Aer Lingus may jockey for the next take-off slot and even Coillte, the forestry agency, may be put on the block for sale.
So what has changed? The key to unlocking the issue, politically, surfaced in Telecom Eireann. The Communication Workers' Union negotiated an innovative agreement under which Telecom's employees would end up with a 15 per cent stake - some of it received in return for concessions on productivity and pensions.
Telecom's employees will do very well from the arrangement. Suddenly, trade union opposition to future privatisations dissipated - provided similar deals were struck elsewhere.
In turn, this means there is no mileage politically for any of the major parties to take an anti-privatisation stance. Even the Labour Party, which traditionally would have favoured State enterprise, is now taking a pragmatic case-by-case view.
But we are still a long way off developing a new paradigm on privatisation. With the old opposition disappearing, we must now develop a new approach to assessing the future of State enterprise.
In many cases, privatisation is the right move. The State has no business in the telecommunication industry, for example.
Nor has it any reason to try to build up a position in the banking industry - the old argument for a "third force" to provide competition to the established sector is well and truly outdated.
And a strategic alliance with the British Airways/American Airlines grouping - followed by a share offering to raise cash for investment - appears a sensible way forward for Aer Lingus. The State, if it remains as a shareholder, would be forbidden by EU competition rules from investing any further capital in the airline. Privatisation can provide a new dynamic for many State companies, freeing management of the shackles of being ruled by a Government department - and all the political considerations which that brings with it.
However, privatisation is no magic bullet. And here is where clear strategic thinking will be needed by the Government - and its successors. There is little point, for example, in turning a State monopoly into a private sector one. The private sector version tends to be even worse in terms of ripping off consumers.
So what does this mean for the future of Aer Rianta, to be considered by the Government in the coming months? The Government is appointing a regulator, to try to impose some quasi-competition on the airport company by imposing controls in landing charges to airlines. But it is not about to give the nod to a second airport for Dublin or anything that would provide real competition.
In this environment, what would privatising the group achieve? And what would it mean for the goal of keeping access to the State as cheap as possible?
Privatising the ESB would also be complicated and tricky. The ESB is effectively involved in a number of businesses - electricity generation, distribution, sales - and all are subject to different forces and considerations. Experience internationally shows that taking the wrong approach can lead to inefficiency and higher prices.
Special mechanisms must also be put in place in a privately-owned electricity sector to ensure that those who invest in expensive generating plant can get a long-term return.
The Government has enough on its plate in beginning to introduce competition into the sector without considering any short-term ownership change, as shown by the debate on the electricity Bill and unhappiness of new entrants such as Viridian - the former Northern Ireland electricity - with the rules in the market here.
The first step has been taken in logically debating the future of all these State companies - the " p" word is no longer banned and the future ownership structure is on the table for discussion. But after overcoming this obstacle, we have still to develop a detailed debate on the future of State companies, taking into account competition and consumer interests.
The decision to sell off Telecom was an easy one - and the correct one - but this does not mean that privatisation is the correct route for all the companies operating under the State's umbrella.
