DD is about to turn 3. I have looked at on-line info for local state schools and don't like what I see. For three of the nearest primary schools where I've managed to locate statistics, two have over 90% of children with English as an additional language, and one over 80%. The schools all have bottom or (rarely) second-from-bottom quintile performance in all subjects, in Ofsted reports. All local state schools are likely to be similar, because they are teaching the same demographic, children of local social-housing tenants, mostly Bangladeshi. (From long experience living in the area, virtually all non-social-housing parents leave the area once they have children.)
We don't want to move because we are near DW's job.
DW is hoping to get DD into the 14th nearest state school (which is only 0.7miles away) using their religious criteria. That school has excellent Ofsted results, "only" two-thirds of pupils have English as an additional language, though apparently one third arrive speaking no English at all.
There is also a just-opened foundation secondary which might be an OK option later.
I suspect we won't get into the good state primary school and will end up private all the way, which we can afford. There is a top girl's school nearby, and the fees are actually slightly less than the 15K a year we spend on nursery care at the moment.
I've calculated that if we don't send DD to private schools for 13 years, and invest the money instead, with average luck (5% return) we'd be able to give her about £250K cash instead.
The title question is mostly rhetorical. I expect that DD will not end up in the sub-par schools, whatever we decide. I'm just a bit bemused by the situation and thought I'd give you all something to comment on.