Brits partnering with ANA units

Previously on the subject of partnering:

...
Update: Is the McChrystal plan the right way to go? I've heard from someone with very good insight into the situation that it most certainly is. But will it be properly implemented--troop increases completely aside--by NATO ISAF and, indeed, the US? In particular:

-ISAF must get away from focusing on force protection, risk aversion, and an over-emphasis on operational security;

--ISAF must share more information, and planning details, with the ANA, and co-locate operational units with ANA units (embedded mentors with the ANA are not enough in themselves).

From an earlier post:

...
McChrystal has said that training could be hastened by improving the partnerships between Afghan units and international combat forces.

American and NATO combat units do not always operate in the same areas as Afghan units. Military commanders said they want to position the units in closer proximity so they can regularly work together [emphasis added]...

Now from UK Prime Minister Brown, via Defence of the Realm:

...
The Afghans are to set up a corps headquarters in Helmand and British forces will be ready to partner 5,000 of the 10,000 Afghan troops being trained by the coalition in Helmand over the next few months. This is not just a case of embedding mentors with Afghan units, as has been done in the past, but working integrally right up to the top of the command chain [emphasis added]. In future operations, the protection of populated areas must be the shared responsibility of Afghan and coalition forces...

Imagine our prime minister actually talking about the conduct of operations. I guess that involves, er, combat.