It seems that some museums in Australia are struggling to deal with non-western items which they view as 'exotic' and 'new' from a cultural and artistic perspective. The acquisition of such items is fraught with issues related to their authentication and interpretation. The administrative consciousness of museums, which entails aspects of cultural inclusion and professional capacity, is important in determining whether a museum can deliver on its promise. The institutional reluctance to entertain doubts about administrative practice has a strong political and isolationist element. It seems as if the museums sometimes choose to insulate themselves from public scrutiny. Consequently, institutions are at risk of alienating the public's faith in their practices and the public records show the institutional weakness in argument when responding to critics. Is there an institutional sense of superiority, in which institutions consider themselves to be the gold standard of art collecting and administrating? Are concerns regarding the conduct and quality of public collections socially justified? Are donations costs free? My paper will argue that the motivation for collecting non-western items should be cultural, and not political or fnancial, particularly when it comes to managing donations. Furthermore, I propose that museums should beneft from, and treasure comments from the public, including art critics and those in the evaluation profession within a culturally inclusive framework.