The vaccine being tested at Oxford university, has antigenic aspects of Ebola spliced to a harmless virus as the carrier. They have injected it into British volunteers and seeing if they get an antibody response.
A friend of ours is a virologist and she was saying ebola isn't so easy to create a vaccine for. Don't recall what the reason was exactly, but it isn't money. Pharma, money and politics may affect it, but there are most certainly people working on a treatment that actually do just want to create a treatment because it is in the best interest of people.
Making an effective vaccine is a strange business – half science – half magic – and half luck. For some viruses, notably smallpox and polio, it was very easy to develop a form of the virus that did not cause the disease (non pathogenic) but was similar enough to the pathogenic form of the virus that, when injected, it could stimulate an immune response that could actually prevent the disease from developing after an infection began. With polio, effective vaccines were quickly developed once scientists figured out a way to grow enough of the virus in the lab. I'm only over simplifying a bit, but the first ways they inactivated polio virus with heat worked at generating a neutralizing immune response. We were lucky. Similar things happened with measles, mumps, chicken pox, diphtheria, typhoid.
We haven't been so lucky with other viruses and a few micro organism-based diseases like tuberculosis and malaria. People have tried hard, but haven't succeeded in getting a neutralizing immune response. Probably the best known example is the HIV virus.
The technique that TLS Guy mentioned in the above quote, seems like a great idea, but it was first developed to get an effective HIV vaccine, and so far hasn't worked for that virus. We'll see whether we get lucky or not with Ebola.
