According to the context, the missing part of paragraph 3 is...

Computer says no: Irish vet fails oral English test needed to stay in Australia

     Louise Kennedy is an Irish veterinarian with degrees in history and politics – both obtained in English. She is married to an Australian and has been working in Australia as an equine vet on a skilled worker visa for the past two years. As a native English speaker, she has excellent grammar and a broad vocabulary, but has been unable to convince a machine she can speak English well enough to stay in Australia.

    But she is now scrambling for other visa options after a computer-based English test – scored by a machine – essentially handed her a fail in terms of convincing immigration officers she can fluently speak her own language.

    Earlier this year, Kennedy decided she would seek permanent residency in Australia. She knew she would have to sit a mandatory English proficiency test but was shocked when she got the results. While she passed all other components of the test including writing and reading, (...). She got 74 when the government requires 79. “There’s obviously a flaw in their computer software, when a person with perfect oral fluency cannot get enough points,” she said. The test providers have categorically denied there is anything wrong with its computer-based test or the scoring engine trained to analyse candidates’ responses. “We do not offer a pass or a fail, simply a score and the immigration department set the bar very high for people seeking permanent residency”, they say.

    Kennedy, who is due to have a baby in October, says she will now have to pursue a bridging visa, while she seeks a more expensive spouse visa so she can remain with her Australian husband.

Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/aug/08/computer-says-no-irish-vet-fails-oral-english-test-needed-to-stay-in-australia