Hardly merits being buried on a suitable competing news day. The annual reduction in real-terms salary is a well worn path, as is the narrative from the supporting cast.
The AFPRB will point a finger at the MOD for non-renumeration issues that influence retention issues and probably moan at MOD for not producing all the reports and staff work that it asked for even though they promptly ignored when setting the 1% rise. The defence leadership already has its funding based on a presumed 1% rise (set last year) and is already reeling from defence inflation being way higher than anticipated, so will not be asking for anything else that may damage the books further.
Politicians will champion the 2% of GDP figure (however derived or however meaningless) and point at those in defence who are lucky enough to get an increment above and beyond the 1%. Meanwhile the Treasury will either grab the 'lower growth/lower inflation, so spend less on wages' argument or the other one, used in better times, 'higher growth/higher inflation so spend less on wages to reduce inflationary pressures'.
Rinse and repeat.