Everyone's taking the F-13=Mig-21 to heart a bit. I was just taking the p*ss. I think they meant F-16 and it was a keypad typo. Still, stealth or not, I think comparing F-35s to Su-30s is a bit of a waste of time as their operational profiles (along with their systems, ordinance, pilot training, etc) is going to have a large bearing on how they are going to fare against each other.
I mean, lightweight aircraft and heavy aircraft are going to be able to perform similar roles, but the way they're applied is going to be quite different (especially with the RAAF's penchant for low level, scattered penetration). The F-35s will do the job nicely and the SuperBugs will be able to provide an effective top cover against the Sukhois, if ever they met (I've got more of a chance of hooking up with Tina Fey!). F-15Es would do it better for around the same cost, but here we are.
I'd say this "are the F-35s worthy" debate here is akin to asking what's 'best' between the F-4 Phantom and the A-4 Skyhawk. Both are good at what they do, they just do it differently. We simply don't need the F-22, even if the US would sell it to us. It's just fear mongering by the uninformed. Unfortunately, that includes the Senate as well.