PM Howard was a decent PM, who did well for the Australian economy. In all, I think Howard had done well, but because he stayed for too long, he lost touch, and started to abuse his privileges. Therefore he had to go.
PM Rudd started decently, got into the m&d because of all these commissions about grocery shopping, but now is doing well because of his steady and decisive leadership on the economy. His government is also doing some stuff like reforming the education system to make it more accountable and responsive, and putting in more funds. These reform efforts are not popular with the unions-Labor Party's base- because of the teachers' accountability. But because reformation is necessary, PM Rudd and DPM Gillard has do the unpopular thing and get through with it, even if they become more popular with segments of the Liberal base, rather than with the Labor base.
In contrast with the PAP government, and its performances, especially in regards to the Selamat case, the increase in living costs, and of course, the response to the economical turmoil, I can't say much, if anything, positive about the PAP.
In my opinion, PM Lee gets a straight F. His cabinet gets an E or at worst, an F also. And as for LKY and GCT, they should have gone a billion years ago. They are ungraded.
I do fear the future of my country more than I fear Australia's future. At least the system is good enough to deliver even if there's a change in the parties at both state and federal government level. In Singapore, there's only one man, and one party, and the people who are below the man are nothing then yes-men. Singapore is in a lot of trouble because of that.