I don't see that it matters whether consciousness is "actual" or "illusory" (whatever that distinction entails) for the purposes of explaining subjective experience. The degree to which that experience reflects, or fails to reflects, physical reality is certainly interesting but I don't see it changing the nature of the problems.

"Instead of asking how neural impulses turn into conscious experiences, we must ask how the grand illusion gets constructed."

I really don't see what the difference is. How are we to interpret the notion that, say, the color Orange is really just a "trick"? Some sleight of mind perhaps?

What point was the author trying to make?