I disagree, I think it looks a lot different to directgov. It's a helluva lot cleaner - every page on directgov is a mass of links to other places, whereas this one focuses much more on the content. The design is also responsive, which is nice (directgov definitely isn't responsive) - it'll look nice on mobile devices. The floating 'relevant links' thing is a nice touch too.

I don't get why the default font for the size is so huge though, they ought to make it smaller a couple of points.

My understanding is that the benefit is the consolidation of various agency websites into a single site, initially replacing DirectGov and Business Link.

Good job it's apparently a lot less money to run than direct.gov.uk, so a huge win for the UK taxpayer!

In what way does it save money? Would be interested in some stats if there are any; presumably they'd be projections at this stage.

It saves money because they're doing the work with an in-house development team, instead of blowing millions of younds per project on expensive consultants from IBM, Accenture etc.

It's cheaper to operate and improve upon (by combining various websites into one over time), it's demonstrably clearer and easier to use than the current DirectGov site(s) - see their design principles here: https://www.gov.uk/designprinciples - and it's designed for the use cases of right now (not 8 years ago).